Political Punch

Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior National Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Chafee Endorses Obama | Main | The Clintons' Black Superdelegate Problem »

Obama Wins Endorsement of Union He Once Slammed

February 14, 2008 9:22 PM

Before the Iowa Caucuses, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, repeatedly disparaged the independent 527 groups backing former Sen. John Edwards, D-NC, and running ads on Edwards' behalf -- the most prominent of which was largely funded by state chapters of the Service Employees International Union, which tonight announced it is backing Obama.

"You've got these outside groups that are helping out candidates and it's a way of getting around the campaign finance laws," Obama griped in Oskaloosa, Iowa, right after the SEIU-backed 527 plunked down $750,000 in TV ads for Edwards.

“Right now groups supporting Hillary Clinton and John Edwards are flooding Iowa and the other early states with millions of dollars in paid ads, phone calls, and mailings," Obama wrote in a memo,  referring to the SEIU and also to groups backing Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, such as the union AFSCME and EMILY's List.

He went after the groups directly, saying a lot of the 527 activities are "paid for by huge, unregulated contributions from special interests," he said. "Taking on these groups isn’t just a matter of setting the record straight about me or my positions. It’s about proving that a new kind of campaign – funded by ordinary people who want something better for all of us – can defeat the same tired, old political textbook that so many Americans just don’t trust anymore."

"Special interests" …..hmmmmmm.

In a power-point presentation, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe called 527s, including (if not especially) the one backed by the SEIU, "shadowy, Washington-based organizations."

Around that time, the New York Times' insightful Matt Bai noted "while Mr. Obama is aiming squarely at Mr. Edwards, he also risks alienating some of the most powerful interest groups in Democratic Washington….In complaining generally about unregulated money in Iowa, Obama’s campaign has invoked the term 'special interests.' This is, of course, how Republicans like to describe unions, so for a Democrat to use that term in reference to nurses and teachers" is seen by some "as an act of betrayal."

Bai went on to "wonder if making this argument, right or wrong, could haunt him later...As one labor activist pointedly told me, Democrats running for president aren’t supposed to go after their friends."

But all is apparently forgiven!

- jpt

February 14, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (51)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/26144392

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Obama Wins Endorsement of Union He Once Slammed :

User Comments

There is only one more chance to correct this mistake. Texas, Ohio, Pa, you hold the key. Vote Clinton

Posted by: Oldgaman | Feb 26, 2008 3:19:24 PM

It's impossible to turn the tide once it gains momentum! US will have a Democratic government & Obama will become US President come 2009. Just like Kevin Rudd and Gordon Brown of Australia and UK respectively. Pacific Observatory.
xstorm

Posted by: xstorm | Feb 17, 2008 7:56:10 AM

Scratch the surface of Obama mania and you find a history of this candidate making whatever promises and deals he needs to score votes - like the sudden announcement one week before Super Tuesday that he supports drivers licenses for undocumented people. And the unions are all run by white, sexist men (I've been a member of several) which is irksome, since they get to use the dues of their mostly female membership to slam Hillary Clinton. Obama is the candidate whom the G.O.P. backed with big donations when they ignored Romney, McCain and other Republicans. That tells you who they think they can better swiftboat in the fall.

Posted by: Factcheck | Feb 16, 2008 2:50:06 PM

People have criticized the people whom they've eventually fallen in love with
and married, so get off of the soap box. We have criticize people who we have later found had more pluses to their character than minuses, and have made better team mates, than the ones we've had. Need I go on. This blah blah blah news reporting is really boring. Try finding a real news story like whats going on in Darfur. I understand there are serious political problems happening there

Posted by: kim | Feb 15, 2008 9:57:16 PM

This is what discrimination and divisions, in America, done to some of us over the years. Here’s man spreading Hope, Unity, Love and Prosperity for ALL Americans. Giving people something to, once again, strive for, that there is still some light at the end of the dark tunnel. Despite this, there is some among us spewing hate, trying their best to make us settle, for the same old divisions and distractions politics of today that keeps this country divided for decades. On the bright side, these are the very reasons why sen. Barack Obama WILL WIN! Never for get that GOOD WILL ALWAYS CONQUOR EVIL!

REMEMBER: We Are The Ones We Have Been Waiting For, and NOTHING Can Stand In The Way Of Millions Of Voices Calling For Change!!

Posted by: Easton | Feb 15, 2008 7:29:17 PM

Have you sen this Larry Sinclaire guy? He doesn't have any teeth! I say, le t the media at this story. Obama will be laughing his butt off, like anyone else who sees this Larry Sincaire guy. Too much!

Posted by: Larry Morton | Feb 15, 2008 7:02:50 PM

Do none of you understand that MAYBE the union has come to understand that their behavior was inappropriate and now have had a change of heart? And just what does Barack's character have to do with the fact that they lied about him and now support him, other than possibly his character has improved their behavior?

Posted by: mlb | Feb 15, 2008 5:46:55 PM

Right now Obama and the media are at their honeymoon stage. Wait until the Presidential election. Democrats will be making a huge mistake choosing Obama to be the Democratic nominee. John Edwards is the most electable of all the Democratic candidates and I am disappointed that he is not on the running. I have never voted Republican before but I will this election. Obama jumped the gun to run for President. He just destroyed the Democrat's chances of being in the white House. Good for him he could go on with his lavish lifestyles even if he doesn't win the election but for the poor and middle income, our only chance to breath a little easier would be gone.

Posted by: Gem | Feb 15, 2008 5:23:43 PM

Wow! The anger is Hillary is spilling over to her parrots. America is seeing clearly that the ole Battlewagon is teetering dead in the water while being flooded with previous torpedo hits from the American people. The ship even IMPLODED on itself with personnel issues. One more torpedo and TIIIIMMMMMBBBBBBEEEEEEEEERRRRRRR!
Let's face it. IT'S OVER.

Posted by: Joris | Feb 15, 2008 3:36:05 PM

Funny that Hillary folks think McCain will get her voters if Obama's the nominee. Sounds like someone else has joined Bush in deserting the reality-based world.

Posted by: Barry | Feb 15, 2008 3:34:29 PM

"oh what a tangled web we weave..when running for president." now can the obama supporters admit that he too "would do anything to be president" something that is thrown out on a regular basis toward her. how very rare to see an article that is negative toward him. there can be no doubt that the media in great numbers has supported him over her and if history prevails over hype, this fact will be recorded for future generations. history will record how one woman had the courage, strength and commitment to carry on. she more than any other candidate exemplifies the true meaning of underdog and comes the most near to McCain in true courage.

Posted by: american2 | Feb 15, 2008 10:49:04 AM

A VOTE FOR MCCAIN IS A VOTE FOR MORE WAR.
A VOTE FOR MCCAIN IS A VOTE FOR MORE SECRECY.

MCCAINS FIRST TERM, WILL BE BUSH'S THIRD.

mccain gets shown as a maverick, but he's really just a puppet, another neo-con looking for his power fix.

do you know what a present vote is used for? no? of course not. and don't bother to find out at all.

Posted by: Dan | Feb 15, 2008 10:28:40 AM

Typical stories for a front runner, throw anything out there, keep repeating it, and see if it sticks. Being dishonest and shouting it to the rooftops still makes it dishonest, it doesn't make it true.

You guys are pathetic!

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Feb 15, 2008 10:24:53 AM

wow, is it just me? or is obamas news coverage getting more and more negative?

since when can't you take an endorsement from a union you once criticized? HE CRITICIZED THE ADS from THE UNION!

if he started doing politics as usual then i would call him a sell out.

Posted by: Dan | Feb 15, 2008 10:24:33 AM

But, just to add - I think a TON of people will be voting McCain rather than Mystery Boy if he gets the nod from the Dems.

I know many people who have NEVER voted Republican, that are just seething with anger over the media lovefest and lack of targeted, tough stories. No one makes him answer for any of it. And his defenders rush in, who don't even fact-check his record, and blindly scream LIES, FOUL, MEAN. :)

I almost can't believe that I might have to hit the RED button in November because I don't think I can vote for someone that can't get his Buttons straight, Yes, No, Present, Nuclear, Maybe. I, in all good conscience, don't think I can vote for someone the media and the public will not check out. Thus I don't think I can vote for him. And that is absolutely a stunning thing for someone who hasn't voted republican for a Dog Catcher, let alone an official position in government.

Posted by: 2009 Where Are You? | Feb 15, 2008 9:10:58 AM

VOTE REPUBLICAN. We don't buy the election like Democrats

"That is so funny I about busted a gut on that one." (see diebolds 2000/2004 campaign contributions)

Posted by: werdup | Feb 15, 2008 9:09:40 AM

Hello Team Hillary,

Well we finally got another win under our belt and into our establishment. It is too bad that the Potomac States of Washington D.C., Maryland and Virginia let our faith in politics fail, as the rest of the Sup0er Tuesday States. I think the state of New Mexico which Gov. Bill Richardson’s Land of Enchantment gave us so much to share and count on.

Here are some issues that I think we should bring out in the campaign:

Intentional Torts: private wrongs against persons and property, and people who are injured by the tortuous act may file civil suit for actual compensatory damages to compensate for their damages.

Battery: the protection of a person’s right to be free form injurious or unpleasant physical contact with others. The battery of unconsented to the least touching can be harmful and offensive.

Assault: Putting a person in apprehension of an imminent or immediate threat to his or her physical safety, designing tort of assault to protect citizens form battery.

False Imprisonment: protecting citizen’s physical freedom of movement and mental freedom form knowledge of confinement interests. The intentional confinement of a person for an appreciable time, a few minutes is enough without the citizen’s consent, occurring when a person restricts another person’s freedom of movement.

Defamation: Protecting citizen’s injury of reputation considered to anguish or harm them,
against torts of libel; written defamation and slander; oral defamation.

Invasion of Privacy: Protecting voters from warranted publicity, commercial use of identity, intrusion or false light.

Please review these proposed issues by the campaign staff

Precinct Captain
Richardo Brown / Team Hillary

Posted by: Precienct Captain Richardo Brown | Feb 15, 2008 9:08:51 AM

sorry eleven 22 that it was sinclair not sullivan who put the lawsuit against him. Read I saw that too, Obama better hope that dosn't make the main stream news

Posted by: werdup | Feb 15, 2008 8:58:05 AM

Hey John , why don't you write about the lawsuit brought against Obama filed yesterday in MN? You know the one that claims Obama had sex with Sullivan while on drugs? I'm waiting for the news articles to come out on that one. I saw the plantiff was on the radio yesterday too. What gives, why can't we find the truth about that one?

Posted by: eleven22 | Feb 15, 2008 8:55:15 AM

And to moeen, with respect:

you seem to have a real issue with Wal-Mart.

The fact that Michelle Obama dealt through a third party with Wal-Mart, and made a small fortune in salary and stocks, just doesn't seem to come up in your Wal-Mart complaint. Oversight on your part? Or deliberate obfuscation?

Trying to dig up the past so you don't have to answer to the present is not a defense - it is a dodge.

Nuclear bills that de-regulate in favor of your Spokesman and your Campaign donator?

Ethics Bills you tout as your own, when you did not sponsor them, co-sponsor them, edit them, or introduce them?

Riding people about their votes on the war when you voted to fund it every single time it came up? Dennis K. had no problems sticking to his Anti-War stance, but you, Mr. Obama? Present again? No, 14 times your voted to fund a war you are against. That's prinicipled tough mettle voting right there.

Desperately seeking the Illinois Church approval for your State campaign, but you 'accidentally' vote for gambling? Then they tear you to pieces and you say I hit the wrong button?

Michelle Obama gets a 130% pay raise at a hospital that 1.) overcharges for services and drugs to the underprivileged by as much as 538%, and 2.) charges black patients on average 6 times as much as whites. And we nary hear a peep about that, now do we?

I and others can go on. It is obvious. When these things are brought up you will bring up the past. You never answer the accusations. You never face the facts. You never admit there is a chance some of this might be true. You never stand up with evidence to the contrary. You divert, dodge, misdirect, and distract. But you never answer.

And I don't mean you, moeen. I mean the entire crew that marches lock step to the dreams and hopes that have no basis in foundation or fact.

To believe that someone can perform miracles requires evidence they performed them before, otherwise, it is another imposter claiming to be Messiah. Is no one going to require he produce evidence that he changed his state, added dreams, gave hope, and produced real results?

Never. That would tarnish the dream. Facts have a way of getting in the way when the story is light on truth and long on fantasy.

Posted by: 2009 Where Are You? | Feb 15, 2008 8:42:52 AM

Well, here goes. My wife tried to post this news article last night, over TWENTY TIMES.

It was removed from this thread each and every time, despite her other comments standing, even this morning. There is no profanity, no errors in dates, or times, or votes. 6 times Obama 'pressed the wrong button'. 6 times he accidentally, like a juvinile, hit NO, when he meant YES, or YES when he meant NO. And we are to trust this man who can't get the VOTE button right? We are to trust this same Mitt-Romney-Yes-No-Maybe-I-Never-Yes-I-Did with a NUCLEAR BUTTON?

here is the story in my next post; they might erase this one too :(

Posted by: 2009 Where Are You? | Feb 15, 2008 8:29:27 AM

If we are to vote for a candidate that we are willing to bet our vote on to hold the highest office in the world, then we as citizens need to know the whole truth about Obama.

We want answers, not just innuendos!

Did Obama do drugs in 1999 and is he still?

If so, then his whole campaign is a lie.

ALso, his memoirs (his book is a fabrication)

I feel that we should let the TV stations know we want answers.

I have already contacted MSNBC for issues relating to their bias reporting on HIllary.

Tucker Carlson must of been warned, because last night on his show he mentioned that he was informed that he has been to hard on HIllary. HIs show last night was the complete opposite of the night before when he slammed Hillary and gave the Black Panther Fist in defiance of HIllary to Al SHarpton.


They are actually very nice there and will put you through to a recorded message that they give to the reporter you are compaling about.

Posted by: stevem | Feb 15, 2008 8:07:34 AM

No he did not seek thier endorsement but boy did he give Edwards camp a hard time when they were endorsing him. If Obama is true to his word and is about change then he should say "Thank you for your endorsement but I can't accept it because as I said before- below is Obama's quote.

" a lot of the 527 activities are "paid for by huge, unregulated contributions from special interests," he said. "Taking on these groups isn’t just a matter of setting the record straight about me or my positions. It’s about proving that a new kind of campaign – funded by ordinary people who want something better for all of us – can defeat the same tired, old political textbook that so many Americans just don’t trust anymore."


WHAT A HYPOCRITE- GO CRAWL BACK UNDER THE ROCK WHERE YOU CAME FROM OBAMA!

Posted by: Frank- South Hampton | Feb 15, 2008 7:39:56 AM

Thank you for switching course! At one point it seemed you were a part of the Obamedia cult, but now you can actually engage him critically! This is very interesting news. Maybe he'll do anything to get elected...just like all politicians.

Posted by: Tony | Feb 15, 2008 7:03:51 AM

Finally some one being willing to speak the truth. Obama is playing any side it takes to win. As a black male I am appalled with some of the things that has happened this election cycle. If Obama is a man of his word then he should reject this endorsement saying he could never have it. If he wanted change why would he allow Oprah to be a main supporter and then say she would not allow anyone else to be on her show. What if a someone of the majority had done that, it would have been called racist and sexists.

Posted by: drepete | Feb 15, 2008 4:27:02 AM

Just please don't vote another Clinton dynasty into the White House. The current Bush dynasty is pretty bad, and we don't want another Clinton in. Heck, with all the whitewater, Monica-gate in the last Clinton administration - you think the new Clinton will do any better? HA!

Posted by: HArry | Feb 15, 2008 3:32:50 AM

Hillary rented out the Lincoln bedroom to raise money for her Senate Run.
Do you think she's made reservations for donors to her current campaign?
They'll be quite upset when she losses.

Posted by: JB | Feb 15, 2008 1:29:51 AM

Below is a list of known federal lobbyists that have acted as fund raisers on behalf of Barack Obama:

Frank Clark
IL
Commonwealth Edison

Scott Harris
DC
Harris Wiltshire and Grannis

Allan J. Katz
FL
Akerman Senterfitt

Robert S. Litt
MD
Arnold & Porter

Thomas J. Perrelli
VA
Jenner and Block

Thomas A. Reed
VA
Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Preston Gates Ellis LLP

Paul N. Roth
NY
Schulte Roth & Zabel

Miriam Sapiro
DC
Summit Strategies

Alan Solomont
MA
Solomont Bailis Ventures

Tom E. Wheeler
DC
Core Capital Partners


Why isn't he just up-front about this?

Or this:

FactCheck: In Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C., Sen. Obama is running a radio ad that claims his health care plan provides "universal coverage." Independent health care experts agree Sen. Obama's plan is not universal and would leave 15 million people uninsured.

He repeated his false claim at a rally in Baltimore.

Obama is manipulating voters. What else has he lied about?

Posted by: Em | Feb 15, 2008 1:07:28 AM

I'm wondering where the "McCain calls waterboarding torture, but then votes against banning it" post is. That would seem to be a much bigger "flip-flop" than this -- you know, one that strikes at the heart of the entire meaning of America. You might also ask McCain why he hasn't called for the immediate prosecution of the Bush administration for war crimes since McCain has repeatedly said that waterboarding is torture and the White House has now finally admitted to waterboarding people.

Or would those questions get you uninvited to those all-important DC cocktail parties?

Posted by: jim | Feb 15, 2008 1:02:43 AM

Thankyou Mr Tapper.
I really appreciate any effort by the media to question or challenge Obama, he should not be recieving a free ride. And I believe it is irresponsible to even consider electing someone we still don't know enough about, the good and the bad. Hillary recieves scores of negative attention, and I'm tired of seeing her words twisted. But at least we already know her mistakes, which are completely impossible to avoid given the amount of time she has spent in the public eye. I admire her for rising above it.

Please continue, many people appreciate it and it is important to know all the facts before voting.

Posted by: Kane | Feb 15, 2008 1:00:54 AM

There CANNOT be a problem if ANY American individual or group should endorse a candidate! So this article is childish!

Since he did not seek their paid promotion nor did have any power to stop people making ads, Edwards wasn't blamed personally because the group INSISTED on promoting him.

It's like a Republican group wants to run an ad AGAINST Hilary Clinton in the Primary. What is she to do about it?

This group HAS NO expectation of favors from Senator Obama; so they ARE FREE to endorse all they want.

Posted by: New Yorker | Feb 15, 2008 12:25:39 AM

The issue here is that Obama can't choose who endorses him. If Bush came out today and said he endorsed Obama, there's nothing Obama can do about it. More than that, what's he going to do? Tell Bush he won't accept his endorsement? Doesn't make much sense to me. If the SEIU decided to back Obama, then they're making that decision knowing how he feels about "special interests". Not much Obama can do except smile and nod.

Posted by: J Blunn | Feb 14, 2008 11:20:37 PM

Anyone questions the sainthood of Obama will be properly labelled a racist. No exception.

Posted by: falsehope1234 | Feb 14, 2008 11:13:22 PM

not clear how he has flipped flopped. He did not pursue an endorsement from them, I don't believe they have run any ads, and if they do I would expect that he not approve them

Posted by: Louis | Feb 14, 2008 11:04:40 PM

Why I'm for Obama:
- When Hillary Clinton graduated from law school, she went straight to work for a corporate law firm, for many years. When Barack Obama graduated number one in his class from Harvard Law School, he turned down big bucks to become a community organizer and Professor of Constitutional Law.
- Clinton generates most of her campaign funds from big donors and special interests, while Obama turns down all contributions from lobbyists.
- Obama opposed the Iraq war and the Kyl-Lieberman amendment – while Clinton supported both.
- All of Clinton’s foreign policy advisors supported the Iraq invasion – while all of Obama’s advisors opposed it.
- The Clinton campaign sent out a dishonest mailer to New Hampshire women shortly before the primary vote which claimed that Obama opposes abortion rights. For the truth, go to YouTube.com and search for “Lorna Brett Howard” (former head of Chicago N.O.W.).
- The Clinton campaign used a blatantly racist campaign of slurs and innuendos in an effort to “ghetto-ize” Sen. Obama – see: Mark “Cocaine” Penn, Bob “Madrassa” Kerrey, Bob “drug dealer” Johnson, and Bill “Jesse Jackson” Clinton, among others.
- Finally, Barack Obama has energized the electorate and will be the most competitive candidate against John McCain – by a long shot.

A.T.
Seattle

Posted by: abt | Feb 14, 2008 11:00:07 PM

How has Obama flip-flopped? THEY endorsed HIM. He did not request it. He did not seek it. In fact, he clearly and obviously spoke out against special interest groups of all types, even those that support Democrats. That's not rhetoric--that's real. And now, once again, THEY want to support HIM. Obama? The same Obama that only accepts campaign contributions from individuals, not from corporations or political action groups (PACs)? Wow, so a "shadowy" loophole monetary special interest PAC wants to support a candidate against special interests--That's not rhetoric--that's real change.

Posted by: Mannewell Darby | Feb 14, 2008 10:50:31 PM

Ohhhh... come now... let's be civil, let's us hope, let's unite for change. Just don't follow the money trail.
YES I CAN!!!!

Posted by: Fred Hoyle | Feb 14, 2008 10:41:43 PM

Oh my, oh my.... you are so caught!!!

Posted by: Fred Hoyle | Feb 14, 2008 10:36:01 PM

we have had 16 years of her stories - and don't change the subject - we are talking about Obama now. Don't bring up something else to avoid facing the facts. Tired dang tactics - point everywhere else but at yourself to avoid facing the music.

Posted by: forlorn but not forgotten | Feb 14, 2008 10:35:20 PM

watch out Georgia, they'll remove your remarks if they really hit home.

They keep putting up these pablum, no-teeth 'tough' stories on Messiama, trying to show they are really 'raking him over the coals'.

Post a tough news story, and they take it down ;)

Posted by: forlorn but not forgotten | Feb 14, 2008 10:33:48 PM

I haven't seen any story about Hillary's Hippocracies like:

1. She said condoned one of her colleague at Walmart board member calling Labor Unions "Blood sucker". Yet she said in a Teamster union she will stand up for Labor union members. (ABC: Brian Ross's report)

2. She condoned WalMart in sending 100s of thousand jobs overseas while at WalMart.

3. Her campaign co-chair took money from Rezko

4. She is the recipient of most money from special interest groups.

5. She has some of those Walmart lobbyist in her campaign staff. (ABC: Brian Ross's report)

and.. many more

How come I don't see any such stories about Hillary in you site. I wonder how does Hillary sweetens you in favor of her in such an unbalanced way?

Posted by: moeen | Feb 14, 2008 10:31:48 PM

It sounds like Obama talks out of both sides of his mouth. Will we get to see his depth and substance for real anytime soon?

Geo

Posted by: georgia | Feb 14, 2008 10:29:57 PM

sorry for the double post :) I have put it up about 8 times so far, and ABC just keeps removing it - they don't want this sort of story reported - it has teeth.

Posted by: forlorn but not forgotten | Feb 14, 2008 10:28:14 PM

Obama's press-appointed halo is beginning to tilt, maybe topple. But dare we criticize him and risk being called racist? Thanks to Jake Tapper for daring to criticize the great messiah. The tables do turn when you least expect. The men in this country would rather have an inexperienced male leader than a strong, capable female. Go to the polls, ladies, and show them what "CHANGE" really means.

Posted by: susan leff | Feb 14, 2008 10:19:31 PM

ABC News appears to work for the Clinton campaign. What a shame.

Posted by: Mark | Feb 14, 2008 10:05:31 PM

Obama wants to tax the american people to pay for global poverty. We need to start with taking care of our own and at home before sending more money overseas!!! 854 billion in 10 years are the estimate this bill he is sponsering/pushing will cost. Vote No to OBAMA and Global Poverty Tax!!!!!!!

Posted by: Deedee | Feb 14, 2008 10:04:17 PM

as usual,
don't say, WOW, that is sort of messed up Barack!

just never believe a thing that might be true, if its against him.

Posted by: forlorn but not forgotten | Feb 14, 2008 10:02:40 PM

everytime I read Jake Tapper's blog, he is in some way slamming Obama or praising Hillary...I ask this question in all seriousness: does Jake Tapper work for Hillary Clinton in some way or does he just not like Barack Obama?

maybe this is his personal Myspace blog and the feed ends up on ABCNews...

Posted by: ??? | Feb 14, 2008 10:00:03 PM

So is he supposed to tell them not to endorse him? I could see him asking them not to run ads for him. He gets plenty of money from us average citizens, and doesn't need to rely on their contributions-- which is an extraordinarily great thing if you think about it.

Posted by: Del | Feb 14, 2008 9:49:45 PM

Yeah, not like Hillary has ever flip-flopped on Iraq or her stance on states she ended up losing or anything.

Posted by: John | Feb 14, 2008 9:43:01 PM

OBAMA the guy that is all FLUFF AND NO STUFF and now the flip flopper

Posted by: HArry | Feb 14, 2008 9:36:08 PM

Post a comment