Political Punch

Those of you complaining about what Carville told the media and what Bill told super-delegates, are really ignorant. I guess that's why you're not political strategists.

Look at the effect.

1. Richardson took a week off campaigning for Obama.

2. He's now doing damage control instead of talking about Obama.

3. He's damaged goods either way. He either lied or betrayed his longtime friends. Lose-Lose situation.

He's smart enough to know what his endorsement meant and now he has to pay the political price. Pure genius, imo, by Carville and Bill.

Richardson could have refrained from endorsing anyone. It was disloyal. Carville is right. People often use the Judas term to refer to betrayal just as Benedict Arnold is used in regard to being a traitor. Religion shouldn't be dragged into this spat. Richardson's umbrage is over the top. Clinton should forget him and never speak of him again. His endorsement is insignificant as are most. Voters should make up their minds independently of endorsements.

In 1968, the Democratic convention produced a presidential candidate that had not campaigned for the nomination.

In 2008, the Democratic convention will do the same.

Albert Gore...he's coming!

Obama supporters seem to hone in on his lead in convention delegates and the popular vote.

The problems remains that no candidate can win the White House by any other means than the electoral college, which Obama cannot win.

George W. Bush taught us that, or has it been that long that some cannot remember?

If you don't agree, then consider the results of a recent (April 1) Rasmussen survey:

"If Obama is nominated, just 56% of Clinton supporters say they are likely to vote for him against John McCain. Forty percent (40%) of Clinton voters in Pennsylvania say they are not likely to vote for Obama."

The same 40% of Clinton voters are the ones that would ensure an electoral loss for Obama in November.

If you really want to see what is going to happen in August at the convention, start reading about the 1968 Democratic Convention.

Perhaps that is why we are starting to hear more from Al Gore.

We can only hope.

"Governor Richardson did indeed promise Clinton his endorsement until Obama promised him a post in his cabinet"

That just doesnt make since considering Richardson was already a 2-time cabinet member for the Clinton administration and a friend of the family. Almost a shoe-in if you ask me.

Worst case I see him as simply jumping on the bandwagon of the person he sees winning before its too late.

I commend Richardson for choosing his endorsement based on what he feels right (the way it should be) and not based on friendship. His maturity is something that is apparently lacking on this board.

Team Clinton is going to be remembered for variations on a single line:
"Imagine what the reaction would be if Obama...."
It's always the reverse-racism line. Always.

Governor Richardson did indeed promise Clinton his endorsement until Obama promised him a post in his cabinet.
Senator Obama wants to come across as a straight arrow but he has a poisoned tip.
There is something sinister, unholy, corrupt and ugly about Senator Obama and no matter how he tries to lie out of it, it can't be changed. He will be a divider of people, not an uniter.

Lana, I saw the Chris Mathews hardball with Obama. You must have been real blind not to see all those University Young Americans and Professors in love with Obama. Blame them for drooling over Obama. Hey, the simple fact is, Obama is 100 times a better candidate than Hillary the Liar and McCain the Moron. If you like Hillary, go vote for her. No one cares!!!

LOM

I see I owe you an answer. Will try to do such over the next couple of days.

Lana writes:
"Chris Matthews was drooling, he should be benched for the entire campaign he is so pro-obama."
-----
It did seem to cross some new line from his usual slightly-embarrassing adulation into the realm of the downright creepy.

Did anyone see Hardball tonight. Chris Matthews was drooling, he should be benched for the entire campaign he is so pro-obama.

I wish he did not cherry pick issues and would have asked Obama about his votes in Illinois on prohibitting the bill to protect a child born alive of a partial birth abortion. Obama is more pro-choice than the NARL. His stances are so far left.

Then for him to say he wants Al Gore in his cabinet and says he talks to him each day. Nice digg.

Using the term "brother" today when fan was annoying him for a pic. So above race lines. I bet he and Michelle sit at home saying "will get all those cracka's voting for us and then we will be sitting pretty in the white house"

MC writes:
"Navarro, The Lincoln quote you post is not mine."
-----
Sorry I didn't make it clear the passage from MC's post was a quotation.

Something is unholy and sinister and ugly about this Obama guy.

Obama folks certainly do have assured and certain mentalities. Facts or no facts. They tell us everyday that it "is all over". Obama leads, math defeats HRC, etc.

However, given all their certainty, I wish one, just one, anyone of them. Would answer these questions:

Please tell me (or us, Clinton dummies) the exact formula by which Obama turns his lead into a win. Obama definitely has a lead, no doubt about it!

You folks are always talking about the "math" against HRC. Please be good enough to tell us the equation by which Obama wins. I have no doubt you know, and are just keeping it a secret. Right?

Right now it seems that the only sure way would be for Hillary to "quit", which you are all calling for to do to "save" Obama. Yet she is not going to do quit!

I thought Obama was the Democratic "savior", why should he even need help?

Then all you Obama folks claim Obama won Texas caucuses. If he did we out here in Texas do not know that either. Maybe y'all actually mean "he has been projected" to win the Texas caucus votes by about 7.

Actually the caucus stuff "ain't over yet", will not be decided until June. JUNE, that is when the Texas Democratic convention convenes in Austin. Until then all is one more case of "speculation".

Texas results will be decided then, and until then Obama has won nothing re Texas. Only HRC has, she won the popular vote, the only vote that is "official", so far!

Until any one of you, or the BHO campaign, "produce" the formula for how Obama actually wins, then all of your bravdo is merely speculation and wishful thinking.

Navarro, The Lincoln quote you post is not mine.

If you read what I wrote, you would see that it is a statement, made by a Dean/MoveOn author.

It comes from Dana Duncan, an author/operative for Dean/MoveOn/Obama. You can check it for yourself at "Burning the Grass Roots.com"(the book).

I think you and any others will be surprised to find that the book is basically a Rovian type playbook re the 2004 campaign, Obama's 2004 US Senate run, and the Obama campaign of today.

“There’s something special about this guy,” Mr. Richardson said of Mr. Obama. “I’ve been trying to figure it out, but it’s very good.”

I have been trying to figure out what obam' message is for last six months. And it's upsetting to me too that he gets endorsements based on his debating himself on almost every issue. The only consistent message of his is that he is running for president.

I am getting to the point where I enjoy reading the comments more then the story. It is great that some of you are so deeply committed to your choice. But so many are making their choices on sound bites they hear or what they hear second hand. Some don't like Obama because of what his pastor at the church he attends said. Myself being one of these who has in their life heard something a friend or someone they knew say something that they would never say or support yet never speak up against unless that for the fact they would be considered supporting that. Then we look at Clinton and some don't like her because of her husband or how she has risen to the position her holds. Personal their views on many things are almost the same so for myself the choice of who might be right comes down to personal values. I would not be with my wife if more then once she had been rumored or proven to be unfaithful to the commitment we made to each other. I know you say love is blind but when someone stays with a person like that then becomes elected in a state they never really lived in but is an important state when it comes to electing our president it sends up a warning to me. I view a person like that as not someone who is really thinking of us middle class workers but as someone who has tasted power and is addicted to it and will do what ever it takes to stay in power thru others to take the blame if what they say strikes a nerve with us but plants the seed or their own actions.

MC writes:
"they have finally found their "Lincoln", and "this time it is not a tall white man""
-----
Might not be a great idea to push THAT comparison too far ... there was MRS. Lincoln, the civil war in which zillions died, and that assassination thing.

from swimming freestyle:

"Barack Obama's election to the presidency in November would put a serious crimp in Bill Clinton's power, influence and resulting earnings. Obama and his Administration would, by virtue of their position, become the de facto leaders of the Democratic Party. Bill and Hillary Clinton will continue to be powerful forces in the Party, but the bulk of that power shifts from the Clinton's to the new guys in town. They become a good deal less marketable.

One can understand why the thought of losing all that might make Bill Clinton a little grumpy."

Let me tell you about polls. Whom do you think takes most of these polls. The ones that are on the internet the most. That would be young adults, white professionals and college kids.

Your average working person whom is middle-aged(especially the working woman or the older woman ) doesn't even use the computer that much.

Your blue collar workers: truck drivers, industrial workers, laborers, etc. ....they are probably never taking these polls, let alone being on the computer to even find these polls.

The polls are so inaccuarte it isn't even funny.

The polls reflect only a few of the voters, and to be honest, probably not even Hillary's base.

People asked a few blogs ago why Richardson was not protrayed as a traitor when he himself ran for president. He was just an IDIOT then for thinking he could actually win. Now you can just call him Judas.

Rev. Wright's James Cone says: "The time has come for white America to be silent and listen to black people."
"All white men are responsible for white oppression. "
"Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man 'the devil.'"
OBAMA 08

Bible interpretation is full of misreadings.

Judas was the only apostle who understood the divine destination of Christ: his death at the cross. His kiss is the kiss of the truest follower.

Judas is the hand of God in the biography of Jesus Christ.

So - Carville still had it wrong.

Interesting that Richardson would complain because Carville is simply using the Obama/Dean/MoveOn playbook.

Regarding such,I hope the blog owner will allow me to correct a bit of misinformation regarding "the playbook".

I have stated on here that I would not post anything that was not factual, when "the fact is' I apparently did make a sub-conscious substitution. I have posted the book title: "Burning at the Grass Roots: Inside the Dean Machine" ridiculously posting my friend's name as the author, as he "sullenly" informed me yesterday ( the names are the same except 1 letter).....Going to cost me a bottle of "single-malt". The correct name of the author is Dana Dunnan, not Duncan as I had posted at some earlier time. The site can be found at "Burning at the Grass Roots .com". Can't put a link on here.

Dunnan was part of the Dean/MoveOn movement (working the press, "spying", posing in Kerry crowds, asking questions to "trip Kerry up", such as one regarding Malcolm X (ironically). The author says Kerry would later, when asked by a child to name his heroes, first cite his supporter Max Cleland, then Christopher Reeves, and Mother Teresa, all for their inspiration to others in rising above their adversity. Then he states that as Kerry did so, he (Dunnan)was struck by how Kerry was describing Dunnan's own vision of Malcolm X’s life. And intrigued that Kerry's heroes were all white folk (authors term). He implies that he saw that as a "weak spot" for Kerry, and one to be expolited if he could do it in front of cameras and the right crowd. He goes on to aver that people asked him about civil rights and he waffled for minutes without answering. Dunnan says that politicians should always have a pat answer on civil rights in their head.. That Dean did!

Dunnan says his effort was aimed at getting Kerry to commit a gaffe of the magnitude of Dean’s Confederate flag controversy . Dunnan then laments that if he(Dunnan) had been black, surrounded by a black audience in South Carolina (certainly has a familiar ring, does it not), he would have fared differently in his effort to trip Kerry up. He says what Kerry did (re the Malcolm X question) was try to be another white guy talking about race- he just couldn’t figure out how to do it.

He talks in another chapter about how Wesley Clark ("a general threat") had to be minimized.and states that given a chance to bird-dog Clark and work the media, the author (Dunnan) jumped all over it, and cultivated his own "press scrum", to Clark’s consternation and detriment.

Among the many reflections, he points out how over-reliance on youth, as well as ignoring the wisdom of veterans doomed the Dean campaign, stating overconfidence of campaign workers often just out of college proved a factor in the campaign's downfall. How the Dean campaign hit a wall after loss in NH., the kids from the Portsmouth office were told that they wouldn’t get paid anymore, and the emotional reverberations of the New Hampshire loss wreaked havoc on the campaign.

I find it very interesting that author points out that Dean claimed that he was the only white candidate talking about race, and that they planned to definitely capture the African-American, senior citizen, and the youth vote. The "Dean/MoveON/Obama machine has the majority of two of the three this time, but has for the most part driven away the third.

Dunnan apparently is still a part of the "machine". He started the book by talking about finding a "Lincoln"(apparently Dean), then later talks about Kerry being compared to Lincoln stature wise, and has since added a "footnote" saying they have finally found their "Lincoln", and "this time it is not a tall white man". He held a book signing for Obama's 2004 Senate campaign.

As I have stated before, I would never have imagined that a "far-left", Rovian, type playbook existed until I found this book. If you just read the "chapter summaries" and the Kerry sample chapter, while mentally substituting Obama for Dean and Clinton for Kerry, you will be amazed at the mirror of the present primary. You will definitely wonder why Kerry and Theresa are "hooked up" with Obama considering their treatment by this "machine", and hopefully ask yourself how Dean could so smoothly pass the MoveOn/Youth alliance to Obama, while at the same time heading the DNC. But you will have no trouble seeing "why". The why is a desire to "root out the old party", replacing it with "theirs", establish a self-perpetuating "movement" that will equal the "far-right" in its desire to hold power indefininately, and a deep disdain for anything Clinton (which explained the viciouoness).

Read the summaries, the sample chapter, and explore the site. Buy the book if you can get it cheap enough that you don't put too much money in their coffers. I bought my copy for 92cents new.

seriously..... who does Richardson owe is "loyalty" over and beyond his country?

the Clintons? are you crazy?

Bill Richardson should just own his decision to support Obama and leave it at that.

James Carville and his "ilk" are the reason Bill Clinton got elected and how Richardson got prestigious cabinet positions.

Namby pamby and too politically correct comes to mind whenever I hear Richardson's name mentioned. Opportunistic also is right up there.

The revisionist history from Richardson is also interesting. Before he was bragging that he didn't return calls to the Clintons for weeks, and now he claims that he was on vacation and didn't know anyone was trying to reach him. Which story is it Bill?

Rusmussen Clinton47 Obama 42

Quinnipac Clinton 50 Obama41

Bill Richardson did what he thought was the right thing in making his endorsement. It's exactly what he should have done: considered what he honestly thought was best for the country, regardless of the personalities. The reaction of James Carville and Bill Clinton speaks for itself. You can tell what kind of standards another Clinton administration would bring: either do what's good for the Clintons personally or hit the road!

There were two Judases with Jesus. Why do we only remember the bad one?

Hmmm?? Take another look. Dated today:

The Public Policy Polling group offers a stunning result: Barack Obama leading in Pennsylvania by 2. And it isn't a poll of adults, or small sample size, either: "PPP surveyed 1224 likely Democratic primary voters on March 31st and April 1st. The survey’s margin of error is +/- 2.8%. Other factors, such as refusal to be interviewed nd weighting, may introduce additional error that is more difficult to quantify."

With friends like the Clintons, Hmmm! In my humble and unbiased opinion, I think Bill Richardson did the right thing - National interest should always trump loyalty to ones friends.

It's funny how people keep making the argument that Bill Richardson owes the Clintons for giving him an opportunity to serve his nation. The real truth is that, to be an effective and a successful president as Bill Clinton was, he needed intelligent and dedicated people in his administration -people like Bill Richardson. He could not govern the country successfully with mediocre administration. Need any proof, look at George W. Bush. Therefore, on the contrary, I think Bill Clinton actually owes his success to good people in his administration, including Bill Richardson.

The truth is that if Bill Richardson wasn't loyal to the Clintons, he would have opted to throw his support to Obama's campaign prior to the primary elections in Texas, Nevada and other stats with large Latino population to garner Obama more Latino votes. But instead he waited until afterwards, and for that, I personllay respect him and believe what he's an honarable man.

I'd suspected Richardson would formally endorse Obama ever since the first contest when his Iowa caucus precinct captains guided Richardson's voters over to Obama. What was amusing to me in Richardson's recent oped was the way Gov. Richardson defended his loyalty to country. Carville called Richardson a "Judas", which is a whole lot different than calling him a Benedict Arnold!

This is well planned out, James Carvel degrades Bill Richardson with a negative biblical commit, (to get to any one that is of a Christian religion)--- Ed Rendell tell everyone that “Fox News” is really the only fair and balanced news covering Hillary ( if you listen to they are really in a Obama bashing mode).
They do anything to win!!! For they believe that that all fair in politics. What kills me is that loyalist they actually believe them.

"It ended with him asking delegates to imagine what the reaction would be if Obama was trailing by just 1 percent"

Where are the Clinton people getting this 1 percent number from? I also recall seeing a Clinton surrogate mention it on CNN. CNN lists Obama at 1,626 delegates and Clinton at 1,486--that breaks down to 52% vs. 48%. Even if you take the margin of delegates and divide that by the total delegates (including unpledged supers and elected delegates), that's still 140/4049 = 3%.

I know the Clintons have a complex relationship with the truth, so that might have something to do with it... Anyone else have any ideas on this?

It's unfortunate for Richardson because the reality is anyone who hires him now, wether it be Obama or whomever will always question his loyalty.

Jayhawk: If putting your loyalty to your country over loyalty to your former boss's wife is an example of "backstabbing" or of "lacking moral fiber," then Richardson clearly is guilty. I've never been much of a Richardson fan, but his stock shot way up after he broke ranks and did what was RIGHT.

Bill Clinton is the gift that keeps on giving -- to Obama.

Liz: I think your logic is backwards. Now everyone knows that Richardson can be trusted.

no name:

And you wonder why Clinton supporters would not support Obama in the general election?? With this kind of speech, it will never happen.

Think, you cannot win alone.

Greg, I really don't care how many states a person wins I am saying if you would have counted FL and MI. people IMO would have thought this whole process was legitimate.

Given that Bill Clinton was not particularly loyal to Hillary, why does he expect Richardson to show unflinching loyalty to her?

Just a bit hypocritical, if you ask me.

Alan,

Obama, like Judas Richardson, is fundamently flawed.

Quinpaq 50 Clinton Obama 41 in PA just released

Rasmussen today Clinton 50 Obama41 in pa
April 2

It is very possible that 'Judas' will become Richardson's first name for the rest of his life.

It will still be sad for Richardson no matter who wins the primary, everybody knows now that he is not to be trusted.

Boras:

You need to consult more than one poll. As with other Obama information, your post is misleading.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey (April 1, 2008) in Pennsylvania shows Clinton leading Barack Obama by five percentage points, 47% to 42%.

More importantly, Rasmussen Reports poll shows if Obama is nominated, just 56% of Clinton supporters say they are likely to vote for him against John McCain.

Forty percent (40%) of Clinton voters in Pennsylvania say they are not likely to vote for Obama.

No matter how he performs in the primary, McCain would win over Obama in the general election, which is what it is all about...unless you are just another Obama fan.

PPP reports:

Barack Obama has taken the lead in Pennsylvania, a remarkable turnaround after trailing Hillary Clinton by 26 points in a PPP poll in the state just two and a half weeks ago.

Obama's steep rise could be a reflection of a growing sense among Democratic voters that a continued divisive nomination process will hurt the party's chances of defeating John McCain this fall. An Obama upset in Pennsylvania would be virtually certain to force Clinton out of the race.

Obama has his customary large advantage with black voters (75-17) and is keeping it relatively competitive with white voters (49-38)

He leads across all age groups except senior citizens and balances Clinton's 10 point lead with women with his own 15 point lead with men.

Bill Richardson describes his decision to endorse Barack Obama as "difficult and painful" and being "truly torn." How quaint...and misleading.

Richardson has a unique way of describing the behavior of a backstabber.

Here in the Midwest we would describe Richardson as disloyal, ungrateful, and lacking in moral fiber.

However Richardson choses to label his two-faced example of disloyalty, the name that is emerging, "Benedict Bill," seems to best describe the character of anyone who would act in such a manner.

HoosierSue,
"Thank you, ddpwoman. Whatever happens this year, the real winners are our
children who are seeing that race and gender won't hold back their dreams of running for president or accomplishing anything else they set their hearts and minds to."

You are absolutely right about that.

God bless you,
Donna

HoosierSue

@Bishop
"If MI and FL had been able to count like IOWA, NH, NV, and SC who all went ahead we would not be talking about this."

DO count them now and see they make no difference: Obama STILL leads in the delgate count, popular votes and states won.

Check the lists at realclearpolitics if you simply refuse to believe it.

Thank you, ddpwoman. Whatever happens this year, the real winners are our children who are seeing that race and gender won't hold back their dreams of running for president or accomplishing anything else they set their hearts and minds to.

fedup,
"ddpwoman, there is NO question in MY MIND that you did NOT have to be pushed to vote bho,like the other 90% black bloc"
That's where you are wrong. You ASSUME that because I am black that I will automatically vote for a black candidate. If that were the case I would have voted for Keyes. I was not one of the black people who voted for Jesse Jackson. I voted for Bush in the last two general elections but I suppose you'll find that difficult to believe also. As a matter of fact, I've never voted for a black candidate. Hmmm.. could it be because I'm racist? Of course not. I am looking at the issues just like I hope you are. Obama being black is not my reason for voting for him but it certainly isn't going to push me away. But you really need to understand that the more you criticize the black voter, the more you insult all minorities and that will in no way help your candidate. Taut your candidates good points and stop worrying about the black vote. Black voters have been faithful to vote for candidates that don't look like them and shame on you for trying to make them feel less patriotic for voting for someone who does. I don't have to prove my loyalties to this country by refusing to vote for a black man. On the issues their is almost no difference between Obama and Hillary. I like the idea of a woman being president. I like the idea of a bi-racial man being president. Although I have a great deal of respect for McCain, I'm just not certain that this war will end as quickly as I wish it to with him as president. Our church has already lost someone to this war. As a mother it breaks my heart to see another woman cry over the loss of her son. I'm not voting AGAINST Hillary, or McCain. I am leaning towards Obama because from what I can tell at this point, amongst all of his flaws, he is the most sincere about where he wants to lead this country. Having said that, I can respect anyone for choosing to vote for someone else.

Tom wrote:

"Your pathetic whining at this stage of the race wins you no favor, nor does your idiotic threats to vote for McCain. Justice Stevens is 87, McCain has awful healthcare, iraq, and economic plans, and you all are going to throw Obama under the bus out of spite? Absolutely Pathetic."

You are the reason why.. not out of spite. Obama can join his grandmother under the bus.

If MI and FL had been able to count like IOWA, NH, NV, and SC who all went ahead we would not be talking about this. To seat them after the Obama is crowned is unfair He could have let them have a re-vote that is why the 15,000,000 who have voted for Hillary will not vote for Obama and there are no where that many new dems or independents to make up a the loss plus count on the people who always vote in the GE only and are mad who will also vote for MCcain he will not only win but he will win big like Regan did when Carter and Kennedy took it to the floor in 80. To think nothing could be worked out is just bs a re-vote should have been done

The Commander Guy -- I'm not criticizing anything. I am specifically asking anyone who is willing to specifically and honestly answer the question as to how Obama "is way ahead and represents a change from the same old same old."

How can you claim that Obama is doing anything other than a 51/49 strategy for this primary? Actually, what he has effectively done is created a 64/36 strategy for a general election that favors McCain. How is that for unification?

It's getting old for folks to claim he will bring about change and a new kind of politics for Washington and then lack ANY kind of specifics as to how he intends to accomplish that.

His policies are very much aligned with Clinton's so how is that change? He has shown how well he brings people together by that fact he is equally responsible for splitting the democratic vote roughly 50/50.

Richardson lies to the voters of NM, why would he tell the truth to Bill Clinton? To paraphrase Geffen, Richardson, Clinton and Obama are all extremely good liars.

That's water under the bridge. Richardson or Judas made his choice - pile on your friend when they needed you most.

He has made his choice, let him live with it. He sold out. Don't need to explain his choice.

looks like his conscience is bugging him.

That's water under the bridge. Richardson or Judas made his choise - pile on your friend when they needed you most.

He has made his choice, let him live with it. He sold out. Don't need to explain his choice.

looks like his conscience is bugging him.

we might as well give bho the nomination. then,
he will run,
he will loose, a
and he will be gone.

HoosierSue,
thank you. I completely respect your reasons for your choice.

vanessa, if you re-look at my post, i said in the general election, in the fall, the black vote will not put him over the edge because the black vote is already in the 40ish% who are always democrats(like the 40% of population always voting republican). what he needs for NOVEMBER, is the % increase in his "given" 40% to beat mccain. those are the numbers he will not have.
ddpwoman, there is NO question in my mind that you did NOT have to be pushed to vote bho,like the other 90% black bloc. thegeneral populous will not be pleased with reverend wright, et.al., or bho's visible lack of patriotic display(pledge of allegiance, hand over heart), or his wife's comments, or his injection of race, or so many other things that will not sit well with many americans. the mere fact you call yourself AA shows a need to be separate. this is our country, and beyond first generations we are AMERICANS! not euro-americans, or asian americans, or indian americans, etc., most people are proud to be AMERICANS.
kudos to you and your family, but that is not what america sees. watch the news with black on black crime, drop out rates, etc. there should be little surprise that i speculate the country is not ready, especially the first time a black man runs.

You should also research what McCain and Hillary have done in the senate, not much. So what do all these guys do.

Nobody is whinning the media just needs to keep every body at each other when are we going to wake up and stop being led by the lies. They are laughing at us all the way to the bank they are just like any other actor's on TV. Maybe that's why the bible say's becareful what you see and hear how can we let them put such hate in are hearts.

ddpwoman, I understand exactly what you're saying and want you to know that Obama won't get my vote - but the color of his skin has absolutely nothing to do with it. Our country is in serious trouble and he's inexperienced. I've researched his background in both the Illinois State Senate and the U.S. Senate. He isn't prepared for the job. I cannot vote for him. I hope you and other African Americans will be able to understand that many people who vote against him do so for this very same reason.

I was proud of the Democratic party when I watched the debates and saw a Hispanic, African American, and woman amongst the candidates. The Republican debates had the same white men we always see. But if I vote for Obama simply to make a statement of progress, then I am being influenced by skin color - and that's just plain wrong and not a good reason to cast a vote.

who really cares

What a bunch of phonies. Why hasn't Dodd retired? Leahy? Kennedy? Daschle had to be thrown out by the voters.

OBAMA IS WINNING IN SMALL STATES ONLY BECAUSE OF BLACK VOTE. LEAVE ASIDE THE BLACK VOTE AND SEE IF HE IS WINNING? LIBERAL PRESS HAS LOST ALL RESPECT AND INTEGRITY FOR JOURNALISM. THEY ARE ACTING LIKE LITTLE PUPPIES OF OBAMA SUCKING AT EVERY MORSEL THAT FALLS FROM HIS MOUTH. SCRIPTED SPEECHES WILL NOT SOLVE OUR NATIONS PROBLEMS. OBAMA HAS NEVER DONE ANYTHING FOR THE BLACK, HISPANIC COMMUNITY OR FOR ANY OTHER CAUSE. HOW CAN WE EXPECT HIM TO ANYTHING IF HE IS ELECTED A DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE? IF BLACK COMMUNITY IS VOTING FOR OBAMA BASED ON RACE, WHICH HAS BEEN PROVEN, THEN WHY SHOULDN'T THE OTHER COMMUNITY DO THE SAME?

fedup,
you said, "dream on bho supporters. like it or not, this country does not want a black president."

As an African-American mother with three very bright, very hard working, African-American sons, that statement really worries me.

As an African-American sister with an African-American brother who served in the military, that statement really angers me.

As an African-American woman with the power to choose the statement really pushes me.
It pushes me to prove that our country is much greater than the America you have described.
It pushes me to vote for Obama.

cappamore wants change I see.

People don't want a third Clinton term after 2 bush terms because they want change. They want the third clinton term so they can go back to the future.

But it don't really matter anymore because this race is OVER.

Richards is LUCIFER not JUDAS. He was enticed with vice presidential post. Obama is DECEITFUL, CALCULATING AND DISHONEST. He sends his ATTACK DOGS -- DODD, LEAHY, RICHARDSON -- and then tell us that Hillary can remain in the race as long as she wants. What a HYPOCRITE. He wants to change Washington but CODDLES CORRUPTION in Illinois and in particular indicted slumlord, Rezko. He gives scripted speeches, on RACE but does not say anything on HATRED perpetuated by his pastor, Wright. Obama not only failed to denounce racists and vile sermons of his pastor but also subjected his children to them. WHERE IS HIS JUDGEMENT which he has made a CRUCIAL part of his presidency. He surrounds himself with American flags but do not respects them. He does not sing Allegiance to the Flag nor puts hands to his heart. He copies everything that hillary does on economics and defense. HE IS GOOD ONLY TO GIVE SCRIPTED SPEECHES and has nothing to show for his PERFORMANCE or ACHIEVEMENTS. Obama and his wife, Michelle, are influenced by their pastor, Wright, this is evident from their words and actions when Michelle says that she was not proud of America until her adult life and that American is MEAN.

The Commander Guy said: "One guy is way ahead and represents a change from the same old same old.

The other is way behind and is a blast from the past.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to make the call here."

Are you kidding? Having Kennedy, Kerry, Richardson, Dodd, Leahy, etc. pulling the strings of a President Obama would represent "Change"???

fedup,

You're wrong.

Explain to me, how you'll explian to AAs how their candidate is winning in pledge delegates, states, and popular vote... yet their candidate loses.

It's not going to happen.

Al Sharpton or whatever his name is will make a BIG deal of this.

AAs will follow his lead and the democratic party will lose it's #1 demographic

It's not going happen... and that is what I believe Nancy Pelosi was speaking of.

The backlash

Hillary Clinton won't get the nomination.

So I believe its best if Hillary supporters start acknowledging this fact and move on.

AA= African Americans

OBAMA IS OUR SAVIOR. Barak and Reverend Wright are Right, God D*** america. Now is the time to rally around Barak and Michelle and make them proud! No more so called elections where typical white people vote, blacks have been held down too long! And news flash america, Barak is right, your typical white american is a racist! Obama will apologize to our Muslim brothers for arrogant american policies of hate and slavery. Only Obama can forgive an evil nation founded on slavery. REPARATIONS NOW!

dream on bho supporters. like it or not, this country does not want a black president.