Good speeches? The only thing she has been good at is laughing like a mad silly old bat in response to serious questions about her voting for using military force against Iraq and, some years later, Iran.

She is totally mediocre; she wouldn't exist as a poltician when there would be no female masses watching Ellen and other TV crap in this country.

Thank God her show is over. She's toast.

Let the CLINTONS get ready to give the concession on Tuesday night. So that we can reunite the party to fight the Republians in General Election in November.

Since the word judgment, or lack thereof, seems to be surfacing with great frequency, let's consider that qualilty in greater detail.

As I do every Sunday morning, I watched some of the major network news programs, including ABC's show with George Stephanopoulis.

During the course of the programming, I noticed "judgment" being coopted as a campaign buzz word by the Obama supporters with increasing frequency.

Perhaps we shall all see whether Senator Obama has exercised good judgment with the outcome and aftermath of the Rezko trial that begins tomorrow.

Another item on the news programs that kept jumping out to me were the results of the polls of voters in both Ohio and Texas.

In every poll that considered the demographic of voter race, the black vote was going to Obama by 85 to 90% or more.

In addition, a large majority of the super delegates defecting from Clinton to the Obama campaign were surprisingly enough...black.

However, when considering other demographics with regards to the candidates, the obvious racial bias was not present.

We have all witnessed the Obama campaign, delegates, super delegates, and supporters play the race card with blinding speed whenever it serves their purpose, in most cases to answer questions about Senator Obama.

Anyone who dares to question Barak Hussein Obama, his past, his family, his record, his experience, his potential, or any other of a host of relevant subjects is labeled as racist, hateful, or fear mongering.

As the judgment of Senator Obama, his family, his campaign, and his supporters is adjudicated in the Rezko trials tomorrow, the race card will undoubtedly again be thrown with great haste.

Taking into consideration the obvious racial bias of black voters and supporters as indicated in the polls, we should ask "Who are the real racists?" and pose a pertinent and deserving question.

Will the rest of the electorate allow the race baiting of the Obama campaign and the racial bias and attacks of black voters to influence their choice of presidential candidate, or not?

Perhaps the silent majority will finally stand up and say "enough is enough," thus exercising a virtue truly lacking in Obama qualifications, good judgment.

Hilliary Clinton is rapidly becoming the female Al Gore. A bad canidate with a horrible campaign strategist/manager in Mark Penn. This guy's brilliance has been the worst I've seen since the captain of the Titanic. Her judgement is horrible (Iraq vote anyone...) but this guy is even WORSE! Perhaps Carville should have led like in '92. He was available.

It's a shame the American public dosen't agree with her to the extent they do Obama LOL

Hillary is not a good speaker nor an inspirator, her discourse is about "I" and "I", that is making it difficult to listen and like that kind of talk. She has to learn from Barak who uses the word "we" and "we" remember YES WE CAN.

Hillary has won more Democratic voters than Obama. He is winning through Republicans and Independents. The independents might vote for him in November, but the Republicans will not.

The Democratic Party has made a mockery of this process. I will give the Republicans credit for not messing up their primary process.

David Ignatius of the Washington Post had a terrific piece about Obama's record as a bridge builder. The bottom line is that he "skips the tough votes" and does not "take any political risks." He did not hold one oversight hearing on Afghanistan because he was too busy campaigning for President. This man is all ambition and only thinks of himself.

Why isn't there any coverage about the threats and intimidation placed upon the black superdelegates to switich to Obama? They are receiving hateful emails, letters, and calls. Is this the type of government that Obama would bring in?

One more thing, there seems to be a lot of anger coming from the Obama side. Why all the rage? For a candidate that promotes unity and change, they sure are reading from a different script.

Can you say hypocrite? I think Hillary wants to grow up to be Barack Obama.

Janet from NH

What a silly post! There are veterans, both a Joint Chiefs of Staff and Chairman, and countless military figures that have endorsed Hillary. Why?

She was an advocate for them about body armor, Gulf War Syndrome, VA Medical Care, Health Benefits for National Guard, and a 21st Century approach to the Military. After the 9/11 attacks, she took care of the 9/11 victims. This is a long health care process.

No one wants to be like Obama. He is an empty slate.

Simply pathetic!!!!!!
Game over, lady.
Dead
Out
Kaputt

Obama Supporters,

Why are all of you so angry? Obama won 11 elections in a row. He has a pile of money, so why all the hateful rhetoric? For a candidate that talks about hope, all of you are acting like spoiled brats.

This country is not electing the next American Idol. There is too much at stake to hand it to Barack Ditto Obama.

I can't wait to read the book that someone will write, who talked him into running and smashing the democratic party to bits who pitted the two most faithful groups against each other.The African Americans and Women of all race have always voted more faithful. I would just like to thank those Sen.In advance.He himself said he wasn't going to run but they asked him .

I will never vote for Barack Obama. In November (if Obama wins the democratic nomination)it will reflect in the polls, how many Clinton supporters voted for McCain. The democrats will be handed a HUGE emberassment!
Geaux Hillary!

Isn't it amazing on how Obama made fun of Hillary's phone ad, but yet he goes and tries to compete with her with his own phone ad the same day.

Obviously, he got nervous because he knew that phone video ad (3:00AM) would get voters thinking about his experience and his instinct at that serious moment to make the right decision.

Hillary would be ready at 3:00 to make the right decision. Obama would just call a meeting at 3:00 am and vote present and let his cabinet decide.

I truly believe come tomorrow with the Rezko trial, alot of bad news will come forward that will put Obama right in the middle of this trial.

There are alot of unanswered questions, especially who was responsible for Rezko to get a visa to come here to this country. Some speculation has been on Obama as being the one to make this possible.

Also, why did Obama find it necessary to give Rezko's son a job at the Law Firm where he worked.

What is the real dealings with Rezko in his home of Syria and his trips and financila dealings with someone in Iraq>

Why didn't Obama tell the truth when he was asked his relationship with Rezko during a democratic debate, and answered saying he only knew Rezko for the 5 hour work he did for him at his legal firm.; when in reality he has known Rezko for over 12 years and even offered Obama a job in his rela estate firm.

Lots of unanswered questions.

Hillary lovers, let us take points by point and remember that being a first lady in Arkansas or in Washington DC has never been part of anybody's CV and or been considered as experience. Judgement is more important than a first lady experience in a globilized and ever changing world.

Stevem:
in followup to your comment, 1) Last Friday morning Mr. Obama, responding to the Clinton ad during a stop in Houston, said: “We’ve seen these ads before. They’re the kind that play on people’s fears to try to scare up votes.” But wait LETS USE IT! The same thing he does in the debates - she gives a policy answer, and he follows with "I agree with Hillary". Does this guy have an original idea in his head?

Except when Clinton opens her mouth all you get is just lies!

“But I want you to understand what real change is,” Obama told the crowd (in Providence, R.I yesterday). “Don't be fooled. Real change means saying what you mean and meaning what you say.
BUT WAIT:
1) Obama is critical of Clinton concerning her vote for appropriations for the Iraq War. But he has no problem being endorsed by Kerry, Dodd and Daschlel who casted yes vote to the same war resolution as well.
2) His drums of anti-Iraq war is SO hollow that instead of supporting the anti-Iraq War candidate of Connecticut who WAS the democratic primary candidate, he instead supported Joe Lieberman who is very pro-Iraq War.
3) Let’s not forget his “Wink, Wink” to Canada in attacking NAFTA. He is attacking NAFTA in Ohio while his chief policy aide told the Canadians that Obama’s criticism is just rhetoric.
4) Obama’s talk of real change is saying what you DON’T mean and meaning what you DON’T say.
Let’s wait until Monday when Tony Rezko’s trial start to find out what more Obama meant and DIDN’T say. I just can’t trust him, can you?

In response to Larry:

I wish that Mr. Russert would of given the question: Who will be the next successor to Putin and what is his name.....I know in my heart, and I truly believe, that he would of fumbled all over the place. It was obvious by the latest skit on snl last night and the news commentators on the news channels today, especially on the Tim Russert show, that they all felt he would not have known the answer.

In fact the group of commentators on the Tim Russert show today said(and even Tim Russert) that he andv they thought she did a good job in describing and knowing the next successor to Putin; and they were a little doubtful that Obama would of known.

So what does thisv tell you!

Obama and “Complete Transparency”?
Ask Obama to release his passport record regarding what he has done for his chairmanship Subcommittee on European Affairs besides not holding any NATO hearings.

Ask Obama how many times has he gone to Iraq or Afghanistan to visit the troops since he talks of lack of ammunitions for our troops and talks of caring for our troops. Hillary Clinton has made multiple trips to Afghanistan and Iraq to visit the troops.

Ask Obama to release his earmarks for YEARS 2005 and 2006 and NOT just 2007. He has refused to release his earmarks for 2005 and 2006 and just releasing his earmark since he started campaigning.

Check out today's NY Time article about Rezko's dealings with Obama. The article is titled: "As Developer Heads to Trial, Questions Linger Over a Deal With Obama"

There is A WHOLE LOT we don't know about him.

I think everything that needs to be said for Clinton and Obama has been said. Little will changes in the next two days. Now it all comes down to which side will get their supporters to the voting booth in the numbers each needs. Obama can afford to lose both but Clinton cannot lose both Texas and Ohio. I hope Clinton wins. If she does it is good for the democratic party to keep the dems front and center in the voter mind. If Clinton wins it keeps the Republican party as a mere after though, exactly where they she be.

For the good of the party, please drop out after March 4th.

Please Hillary, put the party first, and DO THE RIGHT THING!!!!!!!

I've lost track on which side of her own talking points she's on.

After Ohio and Texas, Hillary has to go home because she cannot win but buy a new pillow for Bill so that he can sleep well because sleeping in the church while MLKJ III was speaking was not very comfortable.

Hillary, as a supporter of yours, I just want to ask you to drop out of the race on March 4th if you don't win decisively in both Texas and Ohio.

I know you will put the party ahead of yourself, and do the right thing for the party and country. You have always done so and won't let us down this time.

Please, Hillary, do the right thing on March 4th. We will never forget your service to this country!

HILLARY, PLEASE DO THE RIGHT THING!!!

End this on March 4th so we can defeat McCain and the GOP in November.

DEMOCRATS 2008!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Continue to show the powerful, positive leadership which shows that you are a true fighter, a true patriot, and that you have a spine. Keep up the great work! You are deserving of the nomination.

Jane what makes you think any of the Hillary people will vote for Obama even if she drops out? Had I wanted to vote for Obama I would have done so a long time ago. Not gonna happen.

Hey, Paul, just having fun with you. No offense meant, more looking for a laugh.

Jane, i don't think you are a Hillary supporter at all. Why should she drop out of it is even a close loss or a virtual tie in Texas and Ohio. She still has more super delegates, Florida and Michigan votes need to be counted and the Delegates seated. For a supposed supporter, you really don't have much faith in Hillary Clinton. I say, she needs to take this fight all the way to the convention. Forget about that splitting the party nonsense, May the stronger and hardest fought campaigner win.

WestCoast - interesting comment about how Clinton deserves the nomination. This isn't an entitlement program, in my opinion. Neither deserves the nomination; both will continue to compete for votes as they have for the past year. Thus far, Obama has a near decision lead in that competition.

Wil - thanks, and no offense taken.

Jay - not sure whether Jane is or isn't, but there's faith in a candidate and there's hard numbers. I think Jane was just saying what seems to be mathematical truth. If Clinton doesn't win decisively on Tuesday, there won't be enough contests left to allow her to catch up.

As I've said before, I figure she needs to net at least 60 delegates Tuesday, and maybe as much as 70, just to have a shot at getting back into the race.

Right now it looks like Texas is a toss-up. Even if Clinton pulls it out, its unlikely she'll get more than a 5 delegate difference there, maybe 10 at the most. There's also a good chance she could win the popular vote there and lose the delegate race.

Ohio is her best shot at big gains. Though polls there have begun to tighten.

Rhode Island only has 32 delegates, and those polls are tightening as well.

Vermont seems pretty safely in Obama's camp, based on what I've seen.

Getting a net 60 delegates out of this will be tough.

I JUST WANTED TO ADD A WORD OF ENCOURAGEMENT TO ALL YOU HILLARY SUPPORTERS, MR. HOWARD DEAN WAS ON FOX NEWS THIS MORNING AND HE GUARANTEED ALL THE VOTERS OUT THERE AND THE MEDIA, THAT DNC IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE SUPERDELEGATE PROCEDURE THAT HAVE IN PLACE TO PLEASE VOTERS OR CANDIDATES OUT THERE WHOM ARE TRYING TO CHANGE THE RULES. ACTUALLY, I AM SORRY HE WAS ON CNN THIS MORNING WITH ( i CAN'T THINK OF THE COMMENTATOR'S NAME...SORRY...).....BUT HE SAID THE SUPERDELEGATES WERE PUT IN PLACE FOR A REASON, AND HE AND THE DNC ARE NOT CHANGING THE RULES.

HE ALSO SAID, THERE IS A GOOD POSSIBLITY THAT THERE MAY BE A VOTE OVER FOR FLORIDA, IF FLORIDA PAYS FOR THE DO OVER.

SO MY ADIVCE TO ALL THE HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTERS, EDGE HER TO KEEP GOING EVEN IF SHE LOSES ONE OR EVEN TWO STATES ON TUESDAY.

Mayby Obama should be the one to get ready to give up on Teusday. i think the tide may be turning towards Clinton now.

Ladies, guys, here's the honest truth. On these blogs each of us are hard core Obama or Clinton supporters. Neither of us can or will change anyone's mind here. We're committed, period. No one out the in the real world reads those blogs and then votes on the basis of our give and take. Heck, I hope not. Nevertheless, it is fun to mess with the other side because our side is far superior in everything we say. We even spell most of our words correctly so we win.

Bad news for Obama, the winds are shifting in the latest Rasmussen daily tracking poll...

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows John McCain with a slight lead over both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. McCain now leads Obama 48% to 43% and Clinton 47% to 44%

Well, Jay, at least Clinton seems to be losing by less. We win, I think. Nevertheless, I suspect with approximately half of dems supporting Hillary and half supporting Obama doesn't seem to be taken into account. Or I can always say, if I want to be silly, Obama you aught to drop out.

Gee Sandra, the way I read your comment, you're blaming Hillary Clinton for George bush's trillion dollar debt. That's a little odd.

Some of these are good posts by passioned people!

Primaries/caucuses are not about states - they are about delegate counts. But the election in Nov is about electoral counts. If you truly want the Dems to win you will look hard at the numbers and realize that the media and Obama campaign hype about number of states won are irrelevant in most cases for Nov.

The battleground states are the ones that matter come Nov. Electability is about who can beat the Reps in those states.

As far as the Rezko trials, there is some new information out there - the FBI mole over the past two years is talking now. Obama and the governor of IL did have several meetings with Rezko and these bring new questions to light. I personally have concerns about that and want more information.

to sandra:

Sandra it is a known fact that if Obama was in the senate the same time that HIllary and everyone else was, he would of voted the same as the majority, because his vote would be "present".

The Rezko trial is going to be very damaging to Mr. Obama. He knew of his corrupt past for years, and what Mr. Obama calls a bonehead mistake, I see a greedy Chicago bred politician, only in it for his own self-gain. Since his worshipers, I mean supporters have put him on such a pedestal, this will be a lot harder for them to take should the trial reveal more dirt on Mr. Obama

Sandra, do you really want to go there? OK. Then perhaps you can explain why Obama did not conduct hearings on Afghanistan. After all Obama was the guy who brought us the story of the soldier out of guns and ammo in Afghanistan, remember. Maybe you can go on to explain Obama's NAFTA mess with the Canadians. Furthermore, you never provided proof that Obama read that same intelligence report. Regards to Iraq, wasn't it Obama who stated he would pull out troops and then send them back again IF al Queada had a camp in Iraq. Newsflash: al Queada is already in Iraq, now what?

THIS OBAMA IS THE GREATEST PERFORMER OF ALL TIMES.

I AM AT THIS MOMENT, WATCHING FOX NEWS AND THE ELECTION ALERT RED FLAG COMES UP AND SAYS OBAMA WANTS TO APPEAL TO REPUBLICAN VOTERS TO VOTE FOR HIM, BECASUE IF THEY DO HE GUARANTEES THAT HE WILL INCLUDE REPUBLICANS IN HIS CABINET.

MAN, HE WILL DO ANYTHING TO WIN TEXAS AND OHIO, ETC.

JUST LIKE HIS LYING TO THE VOTERS THAT HE IS AGAINST NAFTA AND THEN SECRETLY CALLS CANADA TO TELL THEM HE IS JUST LYING TO US.

WHAT A CREEP.

what in sam hill is she talking about?

Let's put aside for a sec her very dubious assertion that her speeches are good.

Let's think about "hundreds of thousands" of speeches. Assume this minimally means 200,000 speeches. Taking her claim of 35 years of public service (a bogus one that includes her time as a corporate lawyer), this would be....

...15.65 speeches a day, every day, for 35 years! Assume each speech lasts 30 minutes, and we're talking nearly 8 hours a day of speeches.

No wonder we're tired of hearing from her!

It seems clear, many more people on here want Hillery to run for president. They know that she will be a very good president, also....

The Reps spent 40 million of our tax dollars to try to take Hillary Clinton down for whitewater and she was exonerated. Granted, it lead to Bill Clinton's sex problems and it was certainly not good judgement on their part to spend our money in that since Bill Clinton left office with a greater than 60% approval rating and is still liked by 80% of Dems. My question is: will the Rep engine do the same to take Obama down for Rezko and ties to money from billionaires in countries that support terrorism?

Relax Stevem. I watch all the news outlets. MSNBC & CNN have been Pro-Obama with CNN starting to shift. Fox news is the only one to call out Obama on a myriad of questionable issues. Maybe that's why Bruce is tearing down Fox News.

I can't wait for the best speech Hillary will ever give... you know the one that begins ... "Today I am suspending my campaign..." and ends "I endorse my fellow Senator, Barack Obama..."

Jay:

I think Bruce is upset, because Sean Hannity is the only one whom has the ****** to call Obama's bluff, on his asociation with the weather underground as just being a casual "acquaintance" with this radical group, and much more than that.

IT IS A KNOWN FACT, THAT AYERS, DOHRN AND OBAMA ARE FRIENDS.

Jade7243Hussein: lol I love you screen name.
You will have to wait awhile longer for that speech. Possibly to the convention or it might be Obama saying the same thing.
If it goes all the way to convention, which is a strong possibility, the only salvation will be an combo ticket of OBama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama
That will be the only way to win in the General. So, all of you Obama supporting Hillary haters better swallow some of your pride and arrogance and get with the program.

If Rezko becomes the downfall of Obama; then Peter Paul must be the downfall of the Clintons.

In any event, I want the Clintons back in the White House, because America does not deserve Barack Obama. He has more Secret Service around him than any other candidate, and people still don't think he is sincere about his candidacy.

He turned down working at a major law firm in Chicago to conduct community work. He is not on a power trip, he genuinely wants to help the American people. However, the American people do not deserve him. Give them the Clintons and let them stay relaxed with the status quo.

Maybe this time the Republicans will be successful in impeaching them once and for all.

BELIEVE ME, SEAN HANNITY IS NOT GOING TO LET THIS ISSUE WITH OBAMA AND THIS RADICAL GROUP GO AWAY SOON.

Bruce - News stories on the Rezko trial are the ones that provide money sources for him, ie. Iraqi billionaire who lives in GB and a wire transfer from Beirut, Lebanon. Try reading the multitude of news stories instead of just blogs. Obama may not have any ties to the money but there are certainly questions to be answered. My question was whether the Rep machine will do to him what they did to her. My point is about electability in case you did not get that.

This is such a stereotypically Clintonian response.

First, attack your opponent's perceived strength.
Second, pretend that you could do the same thing if you wanted to. It's simply that you CHOOSE not to give great speeches.
Third, invent a straw-person to frame the debate in the way that you wish.

This response almost perfectly encapsulates everything that is wrong with this style of politics. First, these encounters to which she is referring, "people come up to me and say you know that was so inspiring and so wonderful it made me feel so good," are simply invented from whole cloth. I don't think even her own supporters actually believe that this happens, which means that she is LYING when she recounts these non-existent encounters.

Second, her supposed response: "I say that’s great that’s just words. Our job is to make a difference you know change has been talked about in this election – change is going to happen whether we do anything or not. Change is part of life;" is another fabrication out of thin air.

Even if you were gullible enough to believe the first part about people approaching her and telling her "that was so inspiring," there is NO WAY she would offer such an antagonistic response, "I say that’s great that’s just words." Frankly, someone that panders as much as Sen. Clinton would say no such thing.

If you choose to believe this type of nonsense, then you get what you deserve.

stevem is sure that Senator Obama would have gotten Vladimir Medvedev's name wrong had Tim Russert asked him first. Again, people like you forget that Obama's first degree was in International Relations. Talk about qualifications. The man has a college degree in International Relations, and his first job was as an analyst with a New York firm that helps American companies locate markets overseas. I bet you didn't know all that. Your candidate's qualification, on the other hand, is that she knows all the heads of state (obviously she didn't know this one) and that she met them on state visits as first lady. That's why she hired a campaign full of incompetent staff and clueless loyalists, the same kind of team she would take to the White House. If you can't manage a mere campaign without running it into bankruptcy even before the race begins, with no game plan for the week after the first, how are you going to lead the United States of America in a time of economic recession and war? Just a simple question.

Please.

If the Republican party tries to go toe-to-toe with the Democratic party over their suspicious activity, the Clintons loses hands down!

Jeff C. I guess as a Hillary supporter I will get what I deserve. So you are calling her out to be a liar about her meeting with the voters one-on-one. Were you there when the alleged didn't happen..?lol
My only question to you is have you even heard an Obama speech? A friend of mine in Ohio went to his last rally, he is neither a Clinton or Obama supporter. He said he heard so many platitudes and rhetoric spewing from Obamas Mouth, and with the aside attacks on Hillary, he walked out more confused about Obama than ever.

Excuse me, Bruce, but Mrs. Clinton did know whom the successor would be. She gave a little background info on him if you remember! SHe only had a little trouble pronouncing his name( as Mr. Russert also did). And I will guarantee you, that he >>>Mr. Obama>>>>> did not know whom this new successor was.

He showed a sigh of relief, when she answered that question.

What debate Bruce were you watching.

Get with the program buddy!!!!

Bruce, you talk in suppositions. Just like Mr. Obama. I guess Hillary to you is the equivalent of a high school drop out next to Obama. Last I heard they didn't allow lawyers into college on a GED. I respect Mr. OBama's intelligence, but to downplay Hillary intelligence is just total bias.
Why do you always sound like an Obama attack dog?

Hillary Clinton is done with her campaign, even under rosy conditions for the primaries to come.

She should step out next Wednesday and backup Obama in his political fight with McCain. We want a Democratic White House and a strong and united party. Let Hillary be the new majority leader.

Bruce, Clinton is being outspent 4 to 1. Nevertheless, she's still in the fight and with some luck, if voters turn out, she may be in this thing for the long run. You have slightly more than eleven million voters so far and we have around eleven million. So in my book that is somewhat even. And it only took us one dollar to your every four dollars to be where we are right now. That my friend is more bang for the buck in my book.

SO Ambinder. You're saying if she wins Texas, Ohio and RI, she should step down??? Why in the world would she?
She will have proven to have won all the states that mattered. Maybe if she wins 3 of 4 on Tuesday, we should call for Mr. Obama to step down with your logic.

Jay - I have followed the campaign very closely since I work from home. I have watched just about all of the speeches that were aired online or on the TV and I watched all of the debates - both Dem and Rep. I have to agree about Obama's speeches - they need to be less hat and more cattle. Once he did start pitching plans the plans had already been pitched by other candidates. I suspect he chooses them based on voter support. I dont think he is a bad candidate but I think Senator Clinton is a better one based on track record. To me it is a no-brainer - most qualified gets the job and the junior should be the veep. I am not a lemming and encourage everyone who has not voted to vote smart instead of just listening to speeches. Personally, I like her speeches better and it is ok for me to feel differently than other people. I have never been one to favor speeches that sound like sermons.

At the conclusion of Tim Russert asking the question, Obama IMMEDIATELY turned his head to Clinton. Now, none of us will ever know for certain if he would have been able to know that answer (like Clinton did--she stumbled through it, but nonetheless, she knew his name), but it seems like an odd reaction for a presidential candidate to look to your opponent. I am only speculating, but I am sure there was a certain sense of relief that she responded first. I think it was poor judgment on Russert's part not to have a follow-up "gotcha" question for the candidate who did not answer the first one.

Jay: So you believe that people come up to Sen. Clinton all the time after her speeches and tell her that her speech was incredibly inspiring and made them feel good?

Because there are only two choices: you either believe her recitation of the responses to her speeches or you don't. If you don't believe it's true, then she is LYING. If you DO believe it's true, then you should vote for Hillary and best of luck.

New Yorker, maybe like 40% of most men in a marriage, he had difficulty being faithful to his wife. I commend Hillary in working hard to keep her marriage intact. It is much easier to throw it all away.

DCVoter, you sound like the Clinton's have no skeletons left in their cupboard. Why would Hillary Clinton be more electable than Obama because Iraq billionaires living in GB are wiring money to Rezko (weird logic!)? How about Clinton fundraiser Norman Hsu who was indicted on Dec. 4, 2007 for fraud, sentenced to 3 years in jail in San Francisco in January, and was arraigned once again in New York on further charges only 4 days ago. Hsu donated $850,000.000 (yes, sir, eight hundred and fifty thousand dollars) to the Clinton campaign before he was indicted the second time last year. You think Clinton is cleaner and more electable than Obama? If not, then, what's your point? America doesn't think she is. Consistently, more Americans think more unfavorably of her than they do of Obama. That's why Rush Limbaugh is asking Republicans to vote for her in the primaries so that they'd have a field day taking her down in November. Go figure.

Actually, I have to agree with the Clinton camp that if Obama is unable to sweep all 4 states (given the money spent and the size of his camp) that he is losing momentum and it becomes obvious that the voters remain split thereby making him not the preferred nominee. I think all the votes should count and that both candidates should continue through all states unless one can garner the 2025 delegates before then - which mathematically is not likely.

LOM:

You are so smart! I whole heartedly agree with you. There should of been a follow-up question to Obama on the same subject or similar with .

Tim Russert said today on his show that he now wishes he would of thrown that question to Obama, because he was pretty confident that Hillary knew the answer, but he was very unsure of Obama. In fact, he really didn't throw the question to her directly...she just sort of jumped in and answered it.

Bruce - I never said anything about skeletons in the Clinton closet. I think everyone has skeletons. I think Senator Clinton and Senator McCain have been vetted and would be less likely to have more that we do not know about. The ones we do know about do not concern me. They have both answered and acted satisfactorily. Senator Obama on the other hand, is new to the scene, and is already having signs of serious skeletons that could affect his electability regardless of personal opinion. I am not emotional about this LOL. I am not asking you to change your vote or opinion. I simply put a thought out there for people to discuss intelligently without getting emotional about their candidate.

Bruce, every time someone brings up Mr. Obama being a dirty politician, your only answer is to deflect back to the CLinton's. I know all about the Clinton's , and yes, politics is a dirty game, and no one is clean. I don't know how deep Mr. Obama's dirt goes, so I am supporting Hillary this time around. Remember, they are only 300,000 votes apart counting Florida and Michigan(and they rightfully should be counted)
With wins in Texas Ohio and RI, she may pull ahead of Obama in the popular vote count. Oh wait, then you will all say, it's all about the delegates, not the popular vote.

Bruce is your point the degree to which either Clinton or Obama is dirtier than the other. That seems overly negative for both. In any case, should the republicans try this track on either I do not see any problem in throwing it right back at them. After all they are the party losing members in congress due to dirt themselves. Nothing to worry about for either Clinton or Obama.

Jay:

I am an independent voter at this time. I still have no idea whom I am voting for. Being a Catholic it is very hard for me to choose. But I will say, that if I had to choose between Hillary or Obama, my choice by far would be Hillary.

I do not trust Obama, I personally think he is sneaky, inconsistent and cocky.

Being from Chicago, I know all about the Rezko dealings. And contrary to what the Obama's want to believe, there is still alot that has been unsaid about Mr. Obama's dealings with Mr. Rezko.

We are not only talking about house purchase dealings, but monies going back and forth to Syria and Iraq, and also the government wanting to know how Rezko got a visa to come to this country.

Also, I truly believe if Mrs. Clinton keeps going all the way to the convention, she will win the nomination because........I really believe people are goingt to get sick of Obama and his lies and his inexperience and also his close ties to some really shady people.

All of this will come to light within the next month or so.

You may be right. My thought was sort of two fold though: If Obama is the nominee, I have no doubt the Reps will try to use everything they can to beat him and the Rezko issue will be a strong one for them depending on the outcome of the trial. In any case, it is about perceptions and I think there will be other things they will use against him of course. All things considered I think he is not as electable as his camp and the MSM think he is because of electoral numbers. We wont really be able to predict that until all the states have voted in the primaries. The second aspect was if in the case he manages to be elected, will the Reps within the Congress (still significant in power and numbers) use another 40 mill of our taxpayer dollars to investigate?

Jay, more power to you then. You keep spinning that yarn.

She didn't say that there are "hundreds, if not thousands of people telling her how inspiring she was to them." I'm sure that she inspires many people in many ways.

However, what she said was that people specifically come up to her after her SPEECHES and inform her that her SPEECH was "inspiring and so wonderful it made me feel so good." Big difference.

And, you're right--I wasn't there to know what was said.

But, I also didn't need to read the NIE to know that the case had not been made to go to war with Iraq.

I wasn't in the rooms where meetings were held in 1993, on health care reform, to KNOW that Sen. Clinton so hopelessly alienated members of her OWN PARTY that she couldn't even get her plan to a vote in a democatically controlled Congress.

I don't KNOW that Sen. Clinton lied under oath in her 1998 grand jury deposition when she answered "I don't know" or "I don't recall" 56 TIMES.

So . . . yes, there are quite a few things that I don't KNOW, but am still pretty comfortable stating as fact.

Oh yes . . . one more--Barack Obama will be the next president of the United States of America.

Wil, Senator Clinton is being outspent 4 to 1. That's what her campaign gives as their excuse for failure. Ask yourself, though, how come her supporters are not donating to her campaign? The reason she's still in the fight is because she went in as the frontrunner, the annointed, proclaiming at every opportunity: I'm ready to lead, I'm in this to win, etc. Obama, on the other hand, went in as the dark horse, right at the bottom, far behind her in every race and every state in this nation. Yet he beat every other candidate in the race and pulled ahead of the party candidate. That's a class act, sir. Money is not everything, else Mitt Romney would be the Republican nominee. And the more than one million Americans, including myself, who've donated to the Obama campaign were not bought. I wasn's paid to donate; I donated because I believe. Let's see how many people believe in your candidate enough to put their money where their heart is. She would spend the money if she had it. She simply doesn't have it.

Jeff C: I respect you being an Obama supporter, but seriously. Mr. Obama will never be our next President. The Repubs and McCain will decimate him if he is the Democratic nominee. Plus you have the Anti-Obama vote going to Nader and McCain, Mr Obama will never have enough young or black votes to pull off a victory in the general election.

Bruce - your logic is sort of flawed there LOL. The Obama camp has the majority of rich Dems and the Clinton camp has the core of the Dem party which cannot afford to contribute that kind of money. The voters are split between the can