Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior National Correspondent Jake Tapper
Jake Tapper is ABC News' Senior National Correspondent based in the network's Washington bureau. He writes about politics and popular culture and covers a range of national stories.
RECENT POSTS
- Panetta: Time for Clinton to Concede
- Obama May Declare Victory Before Winning
- The Ellsworth Endorsement
- The June Myth
- Huckabee on Hillary: "I Feel Her Pain!"
- Edwards' Campaign Manager to Endorse Obama
- Mr. Voting Rights Says Florida & Michigan Should Not Count
- Mike Gravel and Obama Girl
- Whither Hillary?
- Conference Call from Planet Clinton
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« State Department: "No, No, No, No, No, No." (Yes) | Main | Keystone Democrats Set to Defect »
The Meaning of the Bill Richardson Endorsement & the Clinton-Rev. Wright Photo
March 21, 2008 7:52 AM
The meaning of this photograph of then-President Bill Clinton and Rev. Jeremiah Wright, provided to the New York Times by the Obama campaign?
Zip.
It means nothing.
The former president shook Wright's hand = Obama's 20-year relationship with him? Preposterous. I can't even believe anyone had the temerity to push the photo. The audacity of hope, I suppose.
Now…as for the endorsement of Obama by New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson…that's huge.
“I believe he is the kind of once-in-a-lifetime leader that can bring our nation together and restore America’s moral leadership in the world,” said Richardson -- Bill Clinton's former Secretary of Energy and United Nations Ambassador -- in a statement. “As a presidential candidate, I know full well Sen. Obama’s unique moral ability to inspire the American people to confront our urgent challenges at home and abroad in a spirit of bipartisanship and reconciliation.”
Endorsements like this mean little to voters in general (though Obama could have used the nod in the squeaker of a New Mexico primary!) but Richardson is a superdelegate, Obama has had a bad week so this comes at a tenuous time, and, quite frankly, Richardson is a man familiar with prevailing winds.
And the Clintons had wanted his endorsement. Bad.
- jpt
March 21, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (212)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/27316546
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Meaning of the Bill Richardson Endorsement & the Clinton-Rev. Wright Photo:
An ineffective Governor endorses an ineffective Senator. Yet another politician who owes his rise to the Clintons turns his back on them now, when they need him most. It appears that Obama is trying to court the Latino vote. This is one Latina and native New Mexican who is not impressed. The Clintons have done far more for our community than Senator Obama has ever done. I'm sure the multitudes of stifled Latino voters in Florida and Michigan would agree.
Posted by: Nancy | Mar 23, 2008 3:35:05 PM
I am not voting for BHO if he is the democratic candidate. Not voting for a hypocrite and a liar
Posted by: Indus | Mar 22, 2008 11:24:27 PM
Why is Richardson newsworthy material? He just wants a shot at VP. Yet the mayor of Philadelphia and governor of Pennsylvania's endorsement of Clinton never made such big news and that's the upcoming primary??
The only thing Obama has going for him is his master spin doctor campaign manager who got a governor elected in MA who shouldn't have been elected, and the people in MA feel duped. Lets learn from their mistake.
Posted by: George | Mar 22, 2008 9:58:02 AM
"tomas" wrote: It is so funny that the Obama campaign keeps saying super delegates should not go against people's choice: see what John Kerry, Ted Kennedy do? And now Richardson? For your information, Clinton won MA and NM!
MY REPLY: Hillary wants the opposite... for superdelegates to vote for whomever they think is the best candidate. And that is what Richardson, Kerry and Kennedy have done... they picked THE BEST CANDIDATE: Barack Obama !!!
And let me point out, that Hillary hardly can claim victory in New Mexico. She won that state by the SMALLEST of margins... something like 1/3 of a percent. And I think Obama got just as many, if not more, delegates in New Mexico.
Hillary supporters always think of ways to undercut and rationalize Obama's victories.
Posted by: Marianne | Mar 22, 2008 4:55:54 AM
Barack Obama didn't really have a "bad week". Richardson's endorsement WAS important. Richardson knows the Clintons very well, and they pressured him HARD for his endorsement. For him to choose Obama is significant.
In addition, by far the majority of people who really heard Obama's entire speech, had very strong positive feelings about it. Obama showed honesty, courage and trust in the American people by giving such an important and sensitive address.
THE REAL STORIES THIS WEEK haven't received nearly the attention that they deserve: 1) Hillary was caught lying about NAFTA. She has been saying that she never supported it, but her White House papers prove otherwise... she gave several speeches in support of NAFTA passing. 2) Hillary WILL BE FORCED to release 20,000 pages of phone logs from her days as First Lady, which she has heretofore withheld. This should reveal some interesting information, I am sure !! 3) Florida and almost certainly Michigan, will not have revotes.
HILLARY IS TOAST!!!
Posted by: Marianne | Mar 22, 2008 4:45:13 AM
I'm less concerned with a five second handshake how many years ago than I am about a Presidential candidate who uwaveringly follows a psychopath for 20 years and still continues to do so.
Posted by: newztixr | Mar 21, 2008 6:44:11 PM
For all of you nit wits who question why Clinton was meeting with Wright, and are too lazy to look up the facts, I'll put it this way.... It was a gathering of religious leaders (plural) not just him and Wright. And who really cares? a 15 second handshake all those many years ago bothers me a lot less than Obama being a die-hard kool aid drinker with the same man for 20 years, who still remains unwaivered to Wright. I omit the title Reverend, because I have seen very little biblical teachings coming from this man. JMHO
Posted by: newztixr | Mar 21, 2008 6:37:11 PM
Hillary's dastardly deeds and hypocracies will continue to manifest themselves as long as she stays on the scene. I think it's time for her to bow out gracefully and maintain at least one shred of dignity. Apparently Bill did not have a problem with Wright.
Posted by: tellin it like it is | Mar 21, 2008 5:42:24 PM
WHAT ABOUT CLINTON LYING ABOUT NAFTA.
WHAT ABOUT THAT PEOPLE?
IS IT OK THAT HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF JOBS AND COMPANIES ARE GONE AND HILLARY KEEP SAYING OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT SHE OPPOSED NAFTA.
WHO'S LYING AND WHO'S COVERING UP?
BILL CLINTON INVITED REV WRIGHT TO THE WHITE HOUSE NOT ONCE BUT SEVERAL TIMES AS A SPRIRITUAL ADVISOR WHEN HE GOT CAUGHT WITH HIS PANTS AROUND IS ANKLES.
ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS.
HILLARY'S CAMP KEEP SAYING THAT BILL SHOOK A LOT OF PEOPLE HANDS HE DIDN'T KNOW WHEN HE WAS PRESIDENT, BUT LOOK AT THE PICTURE THERE ARE ONLY WHITE PEOPLE IN THE BACKGROUND.
AND ANOTHER THING WHY WOULD YOU INVITE SOMEONE TO THE WHITE HOUSE YOU DON'T KNOW?????
REV. WRIGHT HAD TO HAVE A BACKGROUND CLEARANCE DONE TO GET INTO THE WHITE HOUSE. RIGHT? WELL, THEN THE CLINTON'S KNEW ABOUT REV WRIGHT BACK THEN.
WHO'S LYING NOW, BUT MORE IMPORTANT WHO CARES?
IF ITS BEEN TEN YEARS OR ONE YEAR AGO SINCE BILL MET WITH REV WRIGHT, BILL STILL ASKED HIM TO COME TO THE WHITE HOUSE DIDN'T HE?????????????
THAT STATEMENT MAKES YOU GO HUMMMMMMMMM.
WAKE UP PEOPLE, THE MORE YOU DIG STUFF UP ON OBAMA THE MORE YOU MAKE THE CLINTON'S LOOK BAD.
IT AMAZES ME HOW YOU PEOPLE BELIEVE EVERYTHING THAT IS WRITTEN BY THE MEDIA WHO HAS A HIDDEN AGENDA, THEN YOU LOOK STUPID WHEN OTHER THINGS COME OUT THAT WAS OMITTED BY THEM ON THE SAME SUBJECT.
REMEMBER PEOPLE DIVIDE AND CONQUER
THE REPUBLICIAN ARE AT IT AGAIN AND WHO IIS FALLING FOR THIS? THE DEMS
Posted by: TELL IT LIKE IT IS PEOPLE? | Mar 21, 2008 4:23:04 PM
As a native New Mexican I can say that this endorsement of Obama by richardson has almost nothing to do with ideals or philosophy and everything to do with opportunistic calculation by a very calculating politico! I'm really sorry, dems!Regarding the honesty or worthiness of the 2 candidates for the highest elected office in the country, well, all i can say again is, I'm real sorry, dems!
Posted by: rjones | Mar 21, 2008 4:17:46 PM
What I don't understand is why the Clinton campaign declares that there is "media bias" against her yet the media has treated her and Bill with kid gloves when it comes to their tax returns and the Clinton Library and Foundation. I agree that releasing the photo of Wright and Bill Clinton is stooping- something Obama doesn't need to do. I am sick of all the back and forth on both sides. I feel bad for Hillary that she had a plan of how things were going to go and it hasn't turned out that way. I don't doubt she's qualified (although I think she is exaggerating on the experience issue). As a woman carrying the hopes and dreams of so many other women I am sure she is under enormous stress. Unfortunately as entitled and qualified as she may feel, she is not the best and brightest this election cycle. I just hope she can get out gracefully and realize that she can serve this country in other ways without causing so much damage that we are forced to deal with another 4 years of pain and suffering under Republican misleadership.
Posted by: MMMMom | Mar 21, 2008 4:02:29 PM
Wow. I am amazed by the all of the EMOTION on this blog. I can smell the fear in your comments, everything said with such passion. Don't panic, folks. Breath.
I think we're all making a mountain of a molehill. The truth is we have two great candidates who are HUMAN. Everyone makes mistakes. We should be proud of both of them for daring to try.
Isn't life hard enough as it is, do we have to make it more difficult by condemning others?
I promise if you sit STILL and breathe for a while, you will ALL realize who the best candidate is.
Jeff
Posted by: Jeff | Mar 21, 2008 3:54:19 PM
It is so funny that the Obama campaign keeps saying super delegates should not go against people's choice: see what John Kerry, Ted Kennedy do? And now Richardson? For your information, Clinton won MA and NM!
Posted by: tomas | Mar 21, 2008 2:31:55 PM
Bad judgement: not changing churches
Posted by: hmmm | Mar 21, 2008 2:13:23 PM
We don't need to run for office. We can cast a vote for Hillary instead. I love the attempt to denigrate those who don't agree with you...makes for a compelling argument. Difficult to buy the hypocrite argument when you're spewing the stuff that your candidate is so much against. I would suggest educating yourself on the true ideologies of Obama--you'll find they are nothing like the rhetoric you spewing here.
Posted by: LOM | Mar 21, 2008 1:56:53 PM
If all of you are so educated and knowledgeable about Politics and Obama and his lunatic screaming pastor and this would be the one and only reason to not vote for him get off your asses and run for office yourself.
Posted by: roslin | Mar 21, 2008 1:45:48 PM
The bottom line is Obama lacks good judgement. Obama has been busy preaching a new kind of politics but failed to stand up after his preacher told the congregation on the Sunday after September 11 that "America's chickens have come home to roost." Seven years later Obama remains a member of the church, and just last year was still publicly praising Rev. Wright as a "great leader". Even if Obama has his denunciation of Wright's rhetoric last week, but it may be too late. The nature of Obama's longstanding relationship with Wright and the timing of this revelation mean the die is already cast, and no amount of backpedaling or massaging can totally undo the damage to Obama's image. And yes, Obama gave a great speech. Once the speech is done, however, the nagging questions about Obama's relationship with Reverend Wright will almost certainly remain, and the public will struggle to reconcile Obama's message of hope co-existing with Reverend Wright's language of hate.
Posted by: jessie | Mar 21, 2008 1:42:12 PM
Campaigning in FL and MI was against the rules. Fundraising there was not and both candidates did that.
Posted by: LOM | Mar 21, 2008 1:39:41 PM
I am disappointed by some of the comments I have read about the candidates. Remember that they are human like we are with their faults and imperfections. It pains me to see how really divided the Democratic Party is over who should be the next presidential nominee to go up against McCain. We need change from what we as Americans citizens have been subjected to for almost 8 years. I am looking beyond gender and race. I am looking at who would benefit our country, who will focus on the failing economy (people are suffering, losing their jobs, cars and homes). Until reading this blog I did not realize how people are so impassioned by whomever they are backing and see as the democratic frontrunner. Truthfully, I am a black (democrat)female and I initially supported John Edwards who got lost in all the hype from Hillary and Barack. To me he was the realist candidate and it saddened me when he dropped out of the race. I did vote in the primary in my state. John Edward's name was still on the ballot and that is who I voted for. However, I am conflicted about the general election in November. Why? Because right now I am ashamed of the political schemes, rants, accusations coming from Clinton's, as well as, Obama's camps. It has really turned me off from both of them. Honestly, I just might not vote in the general....why should I vote for either one of them when I am not truly 100% behind either candidate. Can the Democratic party unite or will the division continue? Of course this division all plays in McCain's favor.
Posted by: WOW | Mar 21, 2008 1:29:02 PM
Richardson has his eyes on the Obama's VP slot for months. I am not surprised that he finally surfaced to endorse. What I don't get is why is this a headline news in the mainstream media? Hillary gets endorsements all the time and none of those articles were headliners. I guess we're all used to it now how bias the media is against Hillary.
Posted by: mattD | Mar 21, 2008 1:26:39 PM
I refuse to be hostaged by Obama (yes, just read between the lines of his seech!) and his supporters by insinuating or often times explitictly telling me I'm a racist if I don't vote/support him! You guys are really doing wonders for the racial divide of this nation. Personally, I just don't like hypocrites! I saw the videos, not just the racial stuff - but also the lewd stuff Wright simulated on the pulpit. For someone who wants to have a higher standard, Obama chose a pretty low standard for a church and spiritual adviser.
Posted by: Haha | Mar 21, 2008 1:22:44 PM
Thinking:
You said:
"Sorry Jodi, but Clinton flew to FL and Campained there."
Come on now if you are going to be thinking then don't get caught believing the Obama lies. Hillary did not campaign in FL. She flew in after the polls closed to thank voters....Be very carefull what you believe from the Obama camp.....so far just lies come from that camp.
Posted by: jodi | Mar 21, 2008 1:18:28 PM
The truth of the matter is that Obama is going to win the Democratic nomination. But he is going to lose big time in November.
Posted by: Neil | Mar 21, 2008 1:14:25 PM
By showing Bill Clinton's picture and Wright's photo, Obama and his campaign once again show their unethical and willingness to do anything to smear Clinton.
Be polite to somebody is not the same as a 20 years long relationship.
Clinton's campaign and Hillary herself has made it clear that they don't want to comment on Wright, yet Obama wants to drag them in his mess.
Posted by: best | Mar 21, 2008 1:08:42 PM
I'm challenging all of you Obama "haters" out there to do yourself a favor before opening up your mouths again and saying that Barak Obama is a "racist" because of comments that his Pastor made. You need to get transcripts of the full sermons so that you perhaps can gain some insight into what the teachings of Jerimiah Wright are all about, and not form such a "holier than thou" opinion based on a few snipets from some sermons that have been blown out of proportion.
Posted by: Pat | Mar 21, 2008 1:08:37 PM
Richardson made a strange decision and perhaps, a poor judgment.
First, his state went for Hillary so he is willing to take a stand against people in his state as well as the overall sentiment of Latinos knowingly. There is nothing wrong but just strange and beg a question about what's 'sweet stuff' he is being promised to. May be he is aspiring for the VP slot.
Posted by: best | Mar 21, 2008 1:05:36 PM
I guess they promised him the VP slot. Why else would he have the "audacity" to say that Obama has the judgment we need to bring the country together (paraphrasing) in a week that so clearly shows that he doesn't.
Posted by: cappamore | Mar 21, 2008 1:00:34 PM
Sorry Jodi, but Clinton flew to FL and Campained there.
Posted by: Thinking | Mar 21, 2008 12:56:13 PM
Christina:
You said,
"Clinton was not disturbed about the disenfranchisement of FL/MICH voters when she signed on to support the DNC sanction. Now she is SUDDENLY concerned since she needs their delegates. Typical Clinton hypocrisy. "
Howard Deans threat of not seating FL and MI was expected to push both states to change their date back. FL was blocked by republicans. Hillary at no time intended to have any votes not count.
Hillary agreed within the candidate group that none would campaign in FL or MI because the primary date was moved too early and Howard Dean refused to allow it. Part of the DNC rules allows both states to appear before a committe and argue for their right to seat their deligates in June. Both candidates knew this was possible and probable. Hillary true to her word did not campaign in FL or MI but OBAMA DID NOT LIVE UP TO HIS WORD AND RAN 10 DAYS OF ADS IN FL. He then removed his name from the MI ballot while sending campaigners to MI to push for democrats to vote undecided. Both running ads in FL and campaigning in MI were against the agreement he made. Now ask yourself why he would remove his name from the ballot while running for President???? He did that because he knew he could not win in FL or MI and so he wanted another angle to throw at the committee in June as to why they should not be seated. I realize that taking his name off the MI ballot was part of his plan to insure MI votes would not count but I hope and believe that cooler heads will see his stunt for what it is and seat both states as counted.....if not the republicans will win both FL and MI in November.
Posted by: jodi | Mar 21, 2008 12:38:57 PM
I was against Bill Richardson endorsing anyone in this election. He said after he dropped out that endorsements didn't mean much. He didn't think he would endorse anyone for Super Tuesday and he didn't. He then came out to say that after Super Tuesday II, superdelegates should endorse whomever is ahead in pledged delegates. Again, he didn't come out to endorse anyone.
I think he demonstrates really poor leadership with his decision to support someone now. I WOULD FEEL THIS WAY HAD HE ENDORSED CLINTON AS WELL. It almost seems disingenuous to come out when there are other issues people are trying to still digest. What does he know today that he didn't know months ago? Did a single speech really sway him that much. IMO, it just seems like a weak argument.
But, he is free to do as he wishes. It will probably be about as effective as the Kennedy and Kerry endorsements. For the hard-core Clinton supporters, I'm sure they will view this as disloyalty, which may hurt him in the long run.
Posted by: LOM | Mar 21, 2008 12:37:50 PM
"A spokesman for the (Obama) campaign said it was providing the information to show that Mr. Wright was well respected by many, including Mr. Clinton." -as quoted from today's story in the New York Times "Clinton Treats Obama Pastor With Extreme Caution".
Posted by: Ryan | Mar 21, 2008 12:33:38 PM
As an Independent, there is few things I have never liked about the democratic party. First, democrats fall in love with a nominee candidate quickly without vetting. Barack Obama is a excellent speaker. Via Obama's resume, his leadership skill have yet to be tested. No disrespect to Senator Obama, but for Bill Richardson to state "once-in-a- lifetime leader", to date, there is no evidence to validate that statement. Potentially?!
The timing of Bill Richardson endorsement seem to convenient. Barack Obama desperately needs a headline change from the Rev Jeremiah Wright scandal. So out steps, Bill Richardson for more face time, end of the week endorsement. Positive headline change for Barack going into the holiday weekend. Gold points for Bill Richardson to be on Barack Obama's short list for VP.
While we have the freedom to support who ever we wish. I find it disheartening, for people like Bill Richardson, to be willing to step into the lime-light to endorse Obama. Bill Richardson, Al Gore, and many others, would be no name fame aging government employees, if not for the hand of Bill Clinton. I guess that politics. Maybe, I am to loyal.
Posted by: Parker | Mar 21, 2008 12:25:11 PM
Bill Richardson claimed endorsement only after the hope of re-vote in Mi. and Fl. is unlikely.........what a politican..
BTW, Latinos don't like traitor....
Posted by: Truth | Mar 21, 2008 12:24:48 PM
This photo just shows what a hypocrite Wright is. He'll accept an invitation to meet Bill, but then turns around and stabs Bill in the back later in his sermon. Was that nasty pelvic thrust really necessary? In front of kids in church on Sunday?
Posted by: liz | Mar 21, 2008 12:22:33 PM
Considering Hispanics including in NM are Overwhelmingly Supporting Hillary Clinton, I agree with George Stephanopoulos of ABCNEWS that Bill Richardson endorsement is "a big deal" at this time with Obama pastor all over the news. George also said that "Barack Obama will own Richardson a lot",(how much?).
Bill Richardson supporting Obama is like Sheila Jackson-Lee from TX supporting Hillary Clinton, with their constituents going in opposite directions.
Why now? Why no before the Texas primary? Why is Richardson endorsing Obama in Oregon?
May be the wound to the Barack Obama's "united" campaign message is worst than the published polls are telling the voters and Obama camp knows it.
Bill Richardson endorsing Obama will have similar effect to Hispanics, than Ted Kennedy and John Kerry endorsements had to the voters of MA .
Posted by: Angel | Mar 21, 2008 12:21:30 PM
Clinton was not disturbed about the disenfranchisement of FL/MICH voters when she signed on to support the DNC sanction. Now she is SUDDENLY concerned since she needs their delegates. Typical Clinton hypocrisy.
Posted by: Christine | Mar 21, 2008 12:16:50 PM
There are just as many Barak supporters who won't vote for Hillary if she's the nominee, as there are to the contrary. So, way to go Dems, we'll have just handed the presidency to McCain unless we can get it together. That's a fact.
Both sides deserve their share of the blame, but Hillary's scorched earth campaign (ie.- "We won't win the general election if we don't have a revote", and, "John McCain brings experience to the White House", and their constant reminders about Obamas apparent race.) has set the tone if divisiveness to a point where we're not even talking about issues anymore. It's all about playing the fear card.
Politics, like estate issues, brings out the worst in people. Pulled down in to the gutter in the fight for power, and money, even people with the best of intention can't avoid being stained.
Nobody is perfect, and I know we all have our favorites, but the level of pettiness that this race has achieved is drawing enormous smiles from the right wing. They know what's going on, they're fueling it, and we're killing ourselves. We are.
I'm all for the full vetting of each candidate, but keep it to the issues. If Hillary's recent momentum was the result of fact related issues, rather than distortions, fear mongering, and flat-out lies I'd be fine with her as the nominee. But I'm going to have to dig deep to cast a vote for her if she is the nominee as my respect for her is near zero.
See? I'm as guilty as anyone.
Of course Barak has his flaws, and I try to be as objective as I can, but if you really take a close look at what's been happening during this campaign you can see what kind of leader Hillary will be. A divisive one, a bully, and a hawk in the Middle East, and elsewhere. The constant use of the term Commander In Chief is a telling one. It's also known as the Presidency, which seems to have a very different meaning these days. We're not a military society, but we're getting there. Anyway, blah, blah, blah.
Posted by: BMac | Mar 21, 2008 12:12:35 PM
For the guy who commented about the 22 states that Obama has won. (that includes Alaska, where exactly 4000 people participated). Put it on the map like you would if there was a real election, like the one we have nationwide for the Presidency, and you would get Hillary 253 electoral votes, and Obama 205. That states argument, doesn't have much value.
Posted by: beachnan | Mar 21, 2008 12:09:00 PM
Hillary Clinton is the only smart choice in this race.
she is smarter than mccain and obama
If people would start saying I am not voting for hillary because she is wrong on:
ending the war
the economy
student loans
healthcare for all
then we might just have a chance
because you know what she is not wrong
on those issues.
Pa, NC, WVA, Indiana, and all others left to vote-show the rest of us how smart you really are-look over the issues before us real good and vote for the Smartest Candidate left
Hillary 08
no good bye-until 11pm-and while I'm gone-stay on the issues, please
Posted by: j gaw | Mar 21, 2008 12:03:51 PM
Everyone is talking about race. Exactly what Obama wanted when he made that speech. (By the way, he did say his Grandmother, was a typical white person-how is that not a racist comment). Anyway, what everyone chooses to forget, is that Obama stated one day, that he had never heard Rev. Wright say those things, and then in his speech, he said that he had heard them, and then on Larry King, last night he said that he had never heard him say those things. Will the real Obama please stand up. I believe that he and his campaign will say and do anything to get elected. Even be willing to leave 2 states out of the voting because it might hurt his chances. The Uniter fails again.
Posted by: beachnan | Mar 21, 2008 12:03:33 PM
Someone needs to send a memo to the Obama campaign: Today is Good Friday. Holding pep rallies and campaign events today is not the way to court the Catholic/Christian vote, even (and particularly) with a Catholic governor at your side. If you're trying to repair damage from the Wright incident earlier this week, failing to acknowledge what is for many Christians a day of solemnity does nothing to repair your image in the Christian community. You should be home with your family celebrating Easter. If you wanted the Catholic vote, you just lost it.
Posted by: floridian | Mar 21, 2008 12:02:47 PM
And another one in his tally. BIG. But I am certain the Clinton cronies will scream and froth that he does not matter..along with 22 states and the popular vote, lead in delegates and more states....none of that matters LOL Heck just give it to Hillary because....heck they don't even KNOW why anymore.....
Posted by: Sam | Mar 21, 2008 11:55:47 AM
Richardson endorsed Obama? Big Deal!
When Kennedy endorsed Obama, Obama lost
in Massachussetts.Hillary won also in New Mexico. Vote Hillary for President
Posted by: ray | Mar 21, 2008 11:52:12 AM
Actually jgaw it is you who are not up on the facts! It was in fact the Hillary campaign that spoke to the Canadians, not Obama's
Posted by: J. Taylor | Mar 21, 2008 11:48:31 AM
j taylor-you are not up on the issues of today-did you hear what obama told you about Nafta-and then his people went and told the canadians something different? And just a question-
How will us the american voters be helped with the decision on who is best to lead this country-in these times-problems with healthcare, economy,ending the war,student loans
housing...etc, by looking at Clinton, Mccains, and obamas back taxes?
(none of them are perfect-but they are all we have-and if you put some of the others back on the ballot-they are not perfect either.) so what we really should focus on are the issues)
I do not need to see their back taxes-to determine if what they are saying about what they will do for the student loans for college students-is A-makes sense to me B-doable-able to pay for it
C-the right thing to do for everyone.
Stick with the issues.
Posted by: jgaw | Mar 21, 2008 11:42:16 AM
It's wrong to run with the Wright crowd....
Posted by: SadStateOfAffairs | Mar 21, 2008 11:37:25 AM
President Clinton passed NAFTA! Senator Clinton claimed she was against it from the beginning and urged then President Clinton not to propose the bill. Her WH papers show she has been blatantly lying! She was a proponant of the bill from the start! She lied to the voters in Ohio and she's lying to the voters in PA! If Rev. Wright is the evil person Senator Clinton claims him to be, then what this picture exposes is the kind of hypocrisy and mendacity endemic in the Clinton campaign Clinton's! Obama '08
Posted by: J. Taylor | Mar 21, 2008 11:32:51 AM
All this means is that Obama keeps taking endorsements from the very group of politics that he says he wants away from...the politics of old, rich, politically established guys. That's some change- Obama should say no thanks my platform is all about being against you guys. But he either isn't or doesn't have the spine to say it.
Richardson wasn't ever going to endorse Clinton from the beginning because he knew she would never put him in her cabinet or offer him a vice president spot. He's only trying to get some sort of political position from Obama. He'll change his endorsement at the convention just like the rest of them.
Hillary 2008
Posted by: te | Mar 21, 2008 11:32:11 AM
As long as the media news can get something to smear somebody with than they'll run it 24/7 to make the big bucks and it doesn't realy need to be the truth for them to run it.
The Clintons have not released their tax returns yet and they have not released all of documents/files that they have on theirselves or did you forget the Clinton WhiteHouse files that Bill Clinton had locked away when he was President untill the year of 2012.
Sorry but Hillary cannot give those files out for she did not lock them up.
Posted by: owaggoner | Mar 21, 2008 11:31:30 AM
I have not known any preidential candidate ever trying to win by prevent all vote t be counted. that just goes agains the basic tenor of democracy. Is Obama man of principle as long as he has nothing to lose by it?
Posted by: DS | Mar 21, 2008 11:28:03 AM
tomdavie - There is nothing wrong with Hillary Clinton's personality unless you have a problem with intelligent, successful women in general. I find her ability to show her intelligence and toughness in the face of so much misogynistic bias to be refreshing. I blame the DNC insiders for handing the primary to Obama and handing the general election to McCain.
Posted by: mhhunt | Mar 21, 2008 11:27:28 AM
COUNT the VOTES of ALL the DEMOCRATS NOW !!
****************************************
Yes.........The DNC should count all the votes that came from actual Registered Democrates. Not all the independants who aren't willing to join a party and the republican's who were aloud to vote both ways. This will matter in the end.
Posted by: Susie | Mar 21, 2008 11:26:16 AM
you are right, all of these people who are backing obama are expecting something in return-a position or something. or maybe they will be satisfied with know that they helped bring down the smart candidate-Hillary.
If you remember back-I am a 53 year old black female-so I do remember-before the clintons came on the national scene-it was-politics as usual-all cookie-cutter politicians-then the smart guy showed up. and they all knew they could not beat him with smarts-so we ended up with other stuff. Now, the same is true-richardson,kerry,dashle and co. they all know they cannot beat hillary on the smarts of the issues-this is their pay back for the clintons making them feel so inadequate. Hillary has lead this campaign all along-when she talked about security-the national conversation turned to security-remember her 3am ad. (brillant!). when
hillary talks about the economy the conversation turns to the economy-(mostly because the media and others want to pick her apart-but she stands)
That is the sign of a true leader to me. Now the only time obama has lead the national conversation it was after this wright mess. but the conversation has not been good for him-because everytime he opens his mouth or kerry
it goes wrong for him-because he is wrong for the country now. I think this is the time the Black person should be twice as smart as everyone else wanting the job. and he is not.
so he puts out this picture-sad.
I must leave you now-and go practice my standing in line for soup exercise-because that is where we are headed if obama or mccain get into office.good-bye
I try and check back around 11pm
Posted by: jgaw | Mar 21, 2008 11:24:24 AM
Hey Guys are u watching CNN? Did you hear what the lady said?
Posted by: Chan | Mar 21, 2008 11:19:57 AM
Well, think about it, Obama supporters - the TYPICAL WHITE PERSON is going to church this Sunday on Easter. And they will be reminded that Jesus died for our Sins. God forgives us. Rev Wright preaches something entirely different - he preaches not to forgive the sins of the past but to be angry at rich white people. The typical white person will remember this when they vote.
Posted by: The Truth | Mar 21, 2008 11:17:49 AM
I must say people on here forget alot about the Clintons, Let see white water comes to mind ( for those of you thst is the bad land deal with the Mcdougles), theres travel gate (hillary fires the travel staff wrongfully) there of cource Bill's women, there vince foster her lover, by the way he is dead and nobody still know why, yes he supposedlly shot himself (yeh right)? Tons of lies about her leadership? And I am sure she is from New York right//LOL give me a break. You people now that race is the issue, there is nothing else. How many WHITE people want a person of different color to run the goverment?? I am WHOTE and I am voting for Obama. He is the best choice, by the way DID HILLARY explain were she got paid back for the 5 million borrowed ? I bet not..At the begining she was way ahead and said if Florida and Michigan vote early they SHOULD not count, not that she will loose she is CRYING fowl. Just like a WOMAN if you don't your way CRY about it. Please tell me something else/..
Posted by: James | Mar 21, 2008 11:14:10 AM
Give me a break. Obama people will go to great lengths to bash the Clintons. Give it up already. Bow out and let Hillary get on her way to the Presidency.
Posted by: Marylou | Mar 21, 2008 11:11:32 AM
It all means nothing....wright photo was a prayer breakfast photo op...Richardson is a superdelegate who will mean nothing to voters in GE, that was either promised Vp or forced on making this decesion by DNC heads to cover up thier blunder and take pressure off that whiny so called victimized Obama....The passport thing is just a waste of air time(who cares)........who cares. The Dems have already sunk the boat......as they do again and again........How can we let them run the country at such times when serious issues surround this country.
no ones given McCains healthcare plan anytime, it did not look to bad to me.........
Posted by: Dean | Mar 21, 2008 11:08:12 AM
Ram Bahdur K>C...........Just because he (richardson) had the interest of his country above his friendship with clintons makes it his political gain? am out of here.
Posted by: james | Mar 21, 2008 11:08:03 AM
Gov. Bill Richardson has been smart enough to look after his political interest forget the friendship which for him looks like a season change. No further comment is necessary as it is this kind of people who spoiul the politics for4 their own political expediency.
Posted by: Ram Bahdur K>C. | Mar 21, 2008 11:05:11 AM
Hummm. Kerry, Kennedy, Richardson, Dodd, all Presidentail contenders...and LOSERS. Do we see a trend here?
Posted by: SadStateOfAffairs | Mar 21, 2008 11:03:27 AM
Obama and his formidable movement has come to stay,Behold !! the next commander in chief of the armed forces,BARACK OBAMA. Sounds presidential,Hillary and McCain doesn't.
Posted by: roy | Mar 21, 2008 11:03:12 AM
Gov. Bill Richardson has been smart enough to look after his political interest forget the friendship which for him looks like a season change. No further comment is necessary as it is this kind of people who spoiul the politics for4 their own political expediency.
Posted by: Ram Bahdur K>C. | Mar 21, 2008 11:02:49 AM
I think Jake's best point is that Richardson's endorsement of Obama reflects what Richardson, anyway, feels is the prevailing wind. He's angling for a vice president or at least a significant Cabinet spot, and he figures that Obama will be in the best position to give that to him. Doesn't speak well of Richardson as a human being, as he has had a long and close association with the Clintons whom he has now decided to ditch. It may have been the politically astute move, though. We shall see.
Posted by: shellray | Mar 21, 2008 11:02:40 AM
Most of these comments look like they were posted by Republicans who in all probability voted for Bush - not once but TWICE in which case YOUR lack of judgement negates your credibility.
Posted by: Janet P | Mar 21, 2008 11:02:28 AM
After this week, Obama is done.
Stock a fork in him.
Now the Democratic establishment is perfectly capable of selecting him as the nominee.
He will go to a landslide defeat and will take down the Democratic congress with him.
We will end up with McCain and a Republican ongress.
Obama will go down history as the candidate who destroyed the Democratic party.
Posted by: Tom | Mar 21, 2008 10:59:21 AM
The Establishment is using all of their Tricks so Obama won't get elected. They have tried a few ways to use the race card and finally found a way (by using Rev. Wright) to divide the lesser educated whites and the Blacks. I am an educated white man and can see what they are doing but a blue collar guy does not have the luxury to understand how politics works. Whoever thought up this was a genius. It was probably Rove.
Posted by: Jake Anza | Mar 21, 2008 10:58:24 AM
What does it say about a man that would throw his own grandmother under the bus but not condemn Wright the man?
Posted by: russell | Mar 21, 2008 10:57:32 AM
None of the Obama supporters can tell me what we are to conclude from Mr. Obama's africian grab photo.
Posted by: russell | Mar 21, 2008 10:55:47 AM
I must say that after the past couple of weeks I have realized that America will never truly address the truly negative aspects of our great history. As I read some of these comments I wonder how many of us truly understand what a ride its been for Black Americans from Rev. Wrights Generation? As a black man I don't condone or agree with the remarks made by this man. I do believe that we are formed by the experiences that we have in life. If you were born in the post-civil rights era (1968 and onward. The year of the deaths of ML King and Bobby Kennedy) you would have to dig deep to understand what it means to be a second class citizen most of your life, especially in a country that now grants everyone a pretty fair chance to achieve whatever it is that they want out of life. This is a part of our history people! We have to stop running from it and reconcile with it. Believe me when I say that there are people of all races and Genders who have dealt with tremendous discrimination (Native Americans, Irish & Italian Immigrants, Eastern European Immigrants, Hispanics, Chinese Immigrants, Japanese Citizens etc. Add the Female of all above.) the goal should be to ensure that we continue moving towards a more respectful society that tries to embrace each other and resolve these feelings within our fellow citizens.
I challenge everyone out there to widen your circle of acquintances and share with each other your true feelings in a civilized manner.
I know I should be saying how much I despise either Clinton or Obama but truthfully, I have a deep respect for both of them and feel that either of them will lead us on a better course than we are currently on.
Posted by: PatHoffman | Mar 21, 2008 10:54:37 AM
Rev. Writght is not a racist. I don't know him, but I know that Whites and Blacks preach differently because of our social standing in society. He is a very caring and compassionate man. Look at a person's actions. That will tell you everything about them. He had gone above and beyond his duties as a rev. to help people. Someone should come out and sppeak for this man. People are really blowing this way out of bounds.
Posted by: Joyce | Mar 21, 2008 10:54:24 AM
Tracy-
Thank you, We the smart people on this blog-who are supporting the smart candidate-hillary-who runs circles around obama and mccain on the issues that face us today
We thank you for jogging our memory
and I promise from now on I will never or as PAST said "NEVAH"-I will never forget(although you may not be up on the issues of this election)
I will never forget that you TRACY know how to spell the word
GATE
Stick with the issues of today
Posted by: jgaw | Mar 21, 2008 10:53:19 AM
"So Wright was invited to an event in 1998 with PRESIDENT Bill Clinton..so what? This was BEFORE his statements that the government was responsible for 9/11 and Wright was not Bill Clinton's close friend and spiritual adviser."
Exactly. It makes it worse. What does this guy have to be 'angry' about?. He simply hates America.
Posted by: geevill | Mar 21, 2008 10:52:49 AM
Obama descend is of his own making, and would have occurred sooner had the media been less biased and subjected him to the same scrutiny as the other candidates. He is just beginning to be vetted and I suspect we will learn a great deal more ugly about him. As yourself why pandamonia ensued when they learned that someone was looking at his passport file? What else is he hiding. We have just begun to skim the surface and we will learn much more as we get closer to the nomination.
Like thieves in the night, the Obama campaign is desperately looking for something to deflect the impact of his and his minister's racist comments. This has been so typical of him throughout this race for the nomination. Except, this time, he cannot possibly blame Hillary and get away with it.
To those who believe the photo of President Clinton and Rev Wright is incriminating - like I said, thieves in the night. Obama will not be able to shake off this latest string of revelations, no matter how much he tries. Read the blogs. The mainstream media is pretending like nothing has occurred yet voters are expressing an entirely different sentiment. That's also evidenced by the lates poll results. No endorsement in the world will get him back in favor with the very public he has disrespected and whom he wants to lead.
Posted by: Eva | Mar 21, 2008 10:51:48 AM
So Wright was invited to an event in 1998 with PRESIDENT Bill Clinton..so what? This was BEFORE his statements that the government was responsible for 9/11 and Wright was not Bill Clinton's close friend and spiritual adviser.
Moreover, the Obama camp loves to say that they should not have to run in opposition to Bill Clinton...well if they do not then how does this picture matter?
Posted by: Eric | Mar 21, 2008 10:49:54 AM