« Pelosi: Not Surprised Dem '08 Battle Continues | Main | Election Results Don't Stop Paul Revolution »

Let the Vetting Begin, Obama Campaign Says

Share

March 05, 2008 2:36 PM

ABC News' Sunlen Miller Reports: The Obama campaign is pushing ahead full force against the Clinton campaign, saying it's not Barack Obama but rather Hillary Clinton who has not been vetted.

"The point we want to raise is that the vetting of Hillary Clinton has yet to start - that the hard questions have not been asked of Senator Clinton," Obama strategist David Axelrod said. "What's good for the goose is good for the gander."

Axelrod and Communications Director Robert Gibbs told reporters on a conference call that Clinton is being elusive about her tax returns as well as her records from her years as First Lady.

Playing off the Clinton's "Change you can Xerox" line, Axelrod said, "You can Xerox your tax returns... there's not a lot of preparation needed for that."

They called on Clinton to release her tax returns before April 15th, which her campaign has hinted was her deadline. Gibbs says that by then 80% of democrats would have voted.

The campaign insists that this is not a shift in strategy to go negative against Clinton. "This is an attempt to see to it that both the campaign are held to the same yardstick. There's no candidate that has been vetted less in this campaign than Senator Clinton," Axelrod said.

Despite losing Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island, the Obama campaign said they went in with a strong lead and came out with a strong lead. Additionally, they noted that there are 370 delegates less on the playing field right now. Even with Tuesday night's outcome, Clinton has not been able to close the gap, cutting into Obama's lead by only four pledged delegates according to their estimates.

March 5, 2008 in Obama, Barack | Permalink | User Comments (235)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/26818732

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Let the Vetting Begin, Obama Campaign Says:

User Comments

So, Axelrod thinks he can command Senator Clinton to release her tax returns prior to April 15?

Perhaps the Obama campaign czar can get away with that when dealing with his own peasants and minions, but I doubt that the Clinton camp will do much more than laugh.

In my lifetime, April 15 has been the traditional tax deadline for all Americans. Now, we have the Internal Axelrod Revenue Service saying that isn't good enough.

That's about right for a campaign that refers to its candidate as "the Messiah."

Posted by: ken | Mar 5, 2008 2:50:21 PM

if she has nothing to hide, why not release them?

how about releasing all the First Lady documents

the donors to the Presidential Library, why such a big secret?

bill's dubai port deal?

how about kazakhstan?

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 2:52:52 PM

No candidate that has been less vetted? Axelrod sounds just flat out stupid. Who has been more vetted than Hillary Clinton?

So Mr. Hope and Change had the door slammed shut last night and now moves to campaign tactics he swore he would never use.

Dangerous ground for Obama.

Posted by: Kris | Mar 5, 2008 2:55:59 PM

When he was getting win after win he did not have a problem but he is sure acting like a sore loser after Hillary has made this come back.

Posted by: SJ | Mar 5, 2008 2:56:53 PM

Yes.. clinton we need to know.!!!!!!!!!.. democracy = transparency... ooops I forgot you are a Republican

Shame on you for using all the dirty tricks in the clinton's dictoionary to steal votes and still be proud. I wonder how you are able to sleep at night.

Posted by: aurelia | Mar 5, 2008 2:56:55 PM

It's about time!!!

This guy should be fired for not "vetting" Clinton LONG ago. If they had "vetted" Clinton earlier, this race wouldn't be as close as it is now.

Posted by: Sean | Mar 5, 2008 2:57:00 PM

hillary believes as long as she ignores it, it will go away. That is how she and bill handled this in the 90's. Then a slow leak started, and the dam broke...
scandal after scandal

someone explain the experience that qualifies hillary as commander in chief.

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 2:57:34 PM

LMAO, the press releases fromthe Obama campaign just keep getting funnier and funnier.

Like Clinton hasnt been vetted!! aahahahh

There is no one more vetted on the face of the planet.

LMAO who's desperate now!

Posted by: s.b. | Mar 5, 2008 2:58:00 PM

All I can say is thank God all of this stuff is coming out on Obama before the general election, where McCain and Rove would have torn him to shreds. As far as his threat to vet Clinton, good luck -- the Repubs have been at that for 16 years. There's nothing left.

Posted by: LAGuy | Mar 5, 2008 2:58:40 PM

"LA in Indiana", what exactly is "Chicago Politics" of which Obama is the master? Does this pertain to Rezko. Clinton has already completed her part of the process and approved papers for release. Why not have Obama answer all the questions on Rezko-Gate?

Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Mar 5, 2008 2:59:18 PM

other than having a general behind her, because all three candidates have a general supporting them. If its just enough to say she understands....they all 'understand', so that doesn't fly.

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 2:59:50 PM

Hey Ken, you should have seen Axelrod squirming with George Stephanopolous when a) the Clinton campaign pledged a date certain to release tax returns, and b) George S. continued to hammer Axelrod on the unanswered Rezko questions. Axelrod refused to respond. The cracks in the Obama campaign are just starting to appear, just a matter of time in the pressure cooker.

Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Mar 5, 2008 3:02:47 PM

he's already answered them, y'all just don't like the answers because there is nothing there. so you just keep beating the drum....how disingenuous
The Chicago Tribune has done the vetting on this issue already. When it came up again last year, one of the reporters on CBS or NBC (whichever one it was) did a report on this issue. The result? There was nothing illegal, period.

So tell the first lady to release all her documents so the sheeple can see what she is hiding.

She would rather throw her own party members under the bus, well its about time she got dragged under the bus as well. The dragging will be much worse if she wins the nomination, because then she will surely lose.

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 3:04:22 PM

ken: I believe Mr. Axelrod is talking about prior years, returns prepared some time go.

Posted by: aka | Mar 5, 2008 3:04:27 PM

Hillary Clinton has had it very easy on the vetting front. She has not been vetted for the presidential election. Where did that $5 million loan come from?

She thinks people will just let her skate through without revealing her current tax records? The American people deserve to know who is buying access to the Whitehouse.

Hillary is trying out for the most powerful office in the US. I think she should live by same standard that other candidates have honored.

What is she hiding????????

Why no more on her connection with Gupta of Info USA?

Posted by: Grace | Mar 5, 2008 3:05:46 PM

It must be nice for Hillary to have George Steph. in her back pocket doing her dirty work for her.

Posted by: Sean | Mar 5, 2008 3:07:17 PM

A lot of talk about answering questions about Rezko. Specifically what questions about Rezko has Obama refused to answer?

Posted by: Don | Mar 5, 2008 3:07:43 PM

If he is so forth coming with these answers on the Rezko why is the Chicago media after him for answer? Am very sure the media has a lot of other news they can cover but maybe they know something that we don't and need to get to the bottom of the matter.

Or is it that Obama is going to say the Chicago media houses don't like him, so they are just sitting there daily waiting to get something on him?

Posted by: SJ | Mar 5, 2008 3:13:01 PM

they can't say what he hasn't answered, they figure if they just keep beating the Rezko drum, then the hillary sheeple will be afraid....

besides, he is a muslim too, right?! I mean, as far as hillary knows, he's not, right?!

just dishonest rhetoric...she will say or do anything to get elected.

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 3:15:19 PM

We have not had so much fun since the day after the 2000 election. I would not have believed it - but this is going all the way to Puerto Rico!

Posted by: smartprimate | Mar 5, 2008 3:15:29 PM

Every single pundit, analyst, statistician and political strategist points out the futility of the Clinton campaign continuing...that they simply cannot overcome the delegate deficit to best Sen. Obama's lead going into the convention. Why then is Sen. Clinton forging ahead with a campaign that is either destined to lose or lead inevitably to a brokered convention? In the face of certain defeat...against numbers, not advice, that she cannot win...she is marching on. That Sen. Clinton disregards these facts, while beseeching the people to fund her drive, she, more than anyone, echoes the Bush-Cheney mindset...which may explain why she voted for the war in Iraq...and why it is difficult to take her seriously when she claims she can remedy this failing economy -- for nothing she does, as the theoretical candidate of action over words -- offers any kind of "solution" to this problem.

Posted by: H. Aslan Aslani-Far | Mar 5, 2008 3:16:12 PM

Again, what are the questions he refuses to answer. Has the media published them?

Posted by: Don | Mar 5, 2008 3:16:20 PM

Why hasn't Michelle Obama released her thesis on being a black college woman? How come omana isn't being vetted? So a Chicago newpaper vetted obama? Really? I would love to read Michelle obamas thesis - Why is it locked away?
The chosen one is kind of wobbly today?

Posted by: Lou | Mar 5, 2008 3:16:38 PM

The fact is, Obama has waited to late to go negative on Clinton. They shouldn't be complaining about this stuff now. He said HIS campaign WOULDN'T mention all of her campaign SCANDALS eventhough, camp Clinton threw up Rezco day after day. They can't mention that stuff in passing now. And while people with MORE money THAN the CLINTONS have RELEASED their records, it's fine if stupid voters don't care or won't to know just who these people have on the favor roll.

Obama should drop out now because he won't win in the end anyway. However, Clinton will also lose b/c there is no way the people that are attracted to him will vote for her. And there are some fences that won't be mended. So, Obama should drop out. Hillary will lose and Obama can tell the DUMB Democratic voters of Ohio and Texas, kiss .......

Posted by: Intelligent Dem. voter? hardly | Mar 5, 2008 3:18:23 PM

Norman Hsu...or better yet, Peter Paul...that trial is about to start, isn't it?

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 3:22:39 PM

Florida and Michigan!!!

Count 2 million plus democratic votes!

Posted by: s.b. | Mar 5, 2008 3:23:05 PM

The independents and dems who voted for Obama now have another candidate they can back: Ralph Nader.

Posted by: Don | Mar 5, 2008 3:23:45 PM

With so many incredibly important issues we should be discussing, I find it incredibly desperate of the Obama Campaign to continue their attack about this issue. WHO CARES HOW SHE MADE HER MONEY!!? How about this, if Clinton shows her tax return, will Obama come clean with his dealing with the corupt real estate developer or even better, his dealings with the nuclear power industry.

It's okay, the longer this race goes on, the more people are seeing Obama isn't what he appears. He may prefer to wear the halo of a saint, but I for one know that he's no different from any other politician.

Their campaign is sinking. It's just a matter of time....

Posted by: Vasilios Birlidis | Mar 5, 2008 3:24:09 PM

Everyone that is worried about who is bankrolling Hillary or Barak need to step back and ask: Would it be better that they were using their own money or someone else's money to fund their campaigns?

When Mitt Romney was running, the comments were: "He's trying to buy the presidency with his own money!"

Now, with Hillary they are asking: "Who's buying access to the presidency?"

Which is it going to be?? Either they use their own money, or someone else's money....

Posted by: Moneyman | Mar 5, 2008 3:24:54 PM

Michelle Obama has personally released her thesis. You should be able to find it with an internet query.

Posted by: Sara | Mar 5, 2008 3:25:36 PM

Simple minds HRC supporters, go to college and get an education.She is the biggest lier in American politics and you still believe her. She told Tim Russert during the last debate , in front of millions of people: I have requested to have my 100000 files sent to the White House. Next thing is: the White House says they haven't heard from HRC at all!! In your face, lying. What a nerve! Simple minds like that, they like bullies & liers. Shame on that!The world is watching!

Posted by: carmen | Mar 5, 2008 3:28:30 PM

very true Intelligent Dem.

And Michelle Obama's thesis was already released, it was in the news about two weeks ago. Y'all really are lazy, don't research, just continuous spew of clinton/rove talking points.
lol y'all don't have a clue.

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 3:29:09 PM

All of this should have been put to rest last night. No, voters felt sorry for a lady taking a beating by losing back to back contest. Not to mention the negativity coming from her campagin directed at him.

All I can say is this: now that she is the front runner again, she will no doubt face harsh press coverage as all front runners do. So, will she complain again of being treated unfairly?

While I hardly agree with the pundits and commentators, it will be an extremely hard road for her to BOTH attain the Dem. nomination and WIN the general election.

Seriously, she stands even less of a chance of beating McCain. That 3 am ad that she rolled out in the last week, will really bite her in the butt when she faces a war hero or military veteran. Now I can surely see why she has the most support among the uneducated of your party. You people lack deep analytical skills the see the writing on the wall. Oh well congrats to her and him. My party waits in anticipation of going against either of your candidates.

Posted by: Maryanne | Mar 5, 2008 3:30:59 PM

Bus isn't this Axelrod person the same one that tried to sell us the messianic image of Barack Obama with a 'new' style of politics? I don't think you can change your campaign so drastically and pretend to still be seen as a reformer. It's obvious it was just all politics. What's next? "No more Mr Niceguy?"

Once thing we know for sure: OBAMA LIED! He lied in regards to his relationship with Tony Rezko and he lied in regards to the meeting with the Canadian official. OBAMA LIED!

Posted by: Tony | Mar 5, 2008 3:31:26 PM

LA in Indiana:

Really?? Did you really just use "clinton/rove" together?? Really? Really?

Posted by: Moneyman | Mar 5, 2008 3:32:32 PM

Mr. Wolfson since you brought it up...to go with "Tony Rezko."
Here are some names.
Norman Hsu.
Monica Lewinsky.
Peter Paul.
Mike Espy.
Frank Rich.
Craig Livingstone.
Paula Jones.
Linda Bloodworth Thomason.
Harry Thomason.
Ed Willey.
Cattle Futures.
Hugh Rodham.
Tony Rodham.
White... Water.
Vince Foster.
China-gate.
Travel-gate.
File-gate.
Right-wing conspiracy.

Right wing conspiracy isn't big enough to pull off all of these.

Posted by: dl | Mar 5, 2008 3:32:58 PM

sorry but people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones

Posted by: dl | Mar 5, 2008 3:35:02 PM

OBAMA LIED!

Posted by: Tony | Mar 5, 2008 3:35:16 PM

Oh, and Hillary has never lied about anything. ANYTHING! She's as pure as the wind-driven snow.

Posted by: Don | Mar 5, 2008 3:35:53 PM

OBAMA LIED! LOL.. it's working already!

Posted by: Tony | Mar 5, 2008 3:36:41 PM

I think she's hiding something. Where did the $5 million she "loaned" her campaign come from?

If she has nothing to hide then she should release the tax returns now.

Posted by: major1 | Mar 5, 2008 3:38:15 PM

IT'S JUST PART OF THE POLITICAL MANEUVERING - YOU DON'T JUST GIVE IT TO THE OPPONENT WHAT THEY WANT FROM YOU - SHE DOESN'T NEED TO RELEASE HER INCOME TAX RETURN SO THEY SCRUTINIZED IT AND GIVE THEM SOME AMMUNITION - IT JUST FEBRUARY - POLITICS ARE DIRTY THEY HAVE AN ULTERIOR MOTIVE AND PEOPLE ARE NOT BORN YESTERDAY.

WHY NOT HAVE SENATOR OBAMA RELEASE ALL THE EMAIL AND COMMUNICATION THAT HE HAS WITH THE REAL ESTATE DEAL WITH REZKO AND THEN SENATOR CLINTON WILL RELEASE HER INCOME TAX RETURN. I THINK THAT IS JUST FAIR AND SQUARE.

SENATOR OBAMA CANNOT BE TRUSTED ON YOUR WORDS. YOU LOST IN OHIO AND TEXAS STOP WHINING AND STOP CRYING WOLF. YOU JUST MENTION ON YOUR PREVIOUS INTERVIEW THAT YOU WON'T GO NEGATIVE AND NOW HERE YOU ARE AGAIN YOU ARE DOUBLE TALKING.

HOW CAN THE AMERICA VOTERS BELIEVE IN YOU - YOU SAY SOMETHING BUT YOU DO DIFFERENT THING.

VOTERS FROM OHIO, TEXAS AND RHODE ISLAND HAS SPOKEN!

INFATUATION HAS ENDED AND REALITY NOW STARTED.

Posted by: Sam Lim | Mar 5, 2008 3:40:29 PM

Major1:

Uh...hmmm....let's see....what have Hillary and Bill done to make money since they let the White house?

Uh...2 best selling books, speaking fee's, senate paychecks...etc.....

Posted by: Moneyman | Mar 5, 2008 3:40:44 PM

March 05, 2008 2:13 PM

"Complaining about the refs apparently worked a little bit this week," Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, told reporters today. "So in addition to my call to Lorne Michaels, hopefully now people think everything has evened out."

Lorne Michaels is, of course, the executive producer of Saturday Night Live, the show that has done several skits about the media being extra tough to Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY., and extra sycophantic to Obama.

Clinton cited one skit in the last Democratic debate."

IS THIS CHANGE YOU CAN REALLY BELIEVE IN?

Posted by: Anthony | Mar 5, 2008 3:41:01 PM

these woudl be the tax documents from LAST year, not the ones due this year. Thought those should be released as well. As well as the much touted documents regarding her Whitehouse experience.
She has plenty to hide. This is why she wants to wait until she is the nominee before she will release these docs.

Posted by: Louis | Mar 5, 2008 3:41:10 PM

The answer to where the $5 million came from will come out too late to help Obama. But it will sure help McCain.

Posted by: Don | Mar 5, 2008 3:41:35 PM

what did he lie about tony?

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 3:41:45 PM

For months, Sun-Times investigative reporters have had a standing request to meet with Obama, face to face, to get answers to questions such as these:

• How many fund-raisers did Rezko throw for Obama?

• Obama is donating $150,000 to charity that Rezko brought into the campaign. But how much in all did Rezko raise?

• Did Rezko find jobs for Obama backers in the Blagojevich administration or elsewhere?

• Why did Obama only recently admit -- after Bloomberg News broke the story -- that Rezko had toured his South Side mansion with him in 2004 before he bought it?

Dribs and drabs of people's lives have a most unfortunate way of coming out in trials.

Posted by: SJ | Mar 5, 2008 3:41:50 PM

OBAMA LIED & LOST!

Posted by: Tony | Mar 5, 2008 3:42:02 PM

Hillary has been brought in to testify and won. : )

Posted by: dl | Mar 5, 2008 3:44:01 PM

Yesterday the Obama supporters were licking the feet of Texas, Ohio, and Rhode Island voters and today they curse and call them simple minded voters for choosing Hillary. Pay attention PA and other states to come because if you do not vote as the Obama supporters tell you to vote you could find yourselves being cursed and called simple minded as well. Who knew?

Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 5, 2008 3:44:17 PM

he answered the Rezko questions, no lies there....
Tony you don't read/listen to the news? The canadians quietly apologized about that bogus story, and backed up Obamas response. Seems like the canadians are trying to assist the americans having problems with Obama's numbers...he's getting to close to the white house.

How disingenuous for hillary to darken his picture...

you guys are funny and wrong lol

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 3:44:50 PM

That was some deep thinking there Tony!!

I can do that too:

TONY LIED & AND IS AN IDIOT!!

How deep was that??

Posted by: Moneyman | Mar 5, 2008 3:44:51 PM

Carmen,
I agree. Let us not forget she promised the residents of her state 5illion new jobs. Not only did she not produce such, they lost jobs. Now it appears the residents of Ohio must have fallen victim to the same lie. Not only will workers, avg. workers, be working longer hours for less pay, but now the govt. will garnish even more of their salaries by forcing people to pay for something else!

LA in Indiana,
I agree with you as well. In fact, I believe the only reason her keep mentioning Tony is they know he doesn't want to go negative. They knew he didn't want to mention her camp woes - or the tasteless bit of auctioning out a room in the White House.

In any case, it doesnt matter. Fortunate for us, we have great careers, nice home, nice cars, very comfortable savings or security blanket. I just think it is a shame people would elect someone out of fear, blind loyalty, bias, etc.

Posted by: Marisol Morgan | Mar 5, 2008 3:45:23 PM

Rezko and no charges can only go so far gang especially coming from the Clintons.

Fine, finally I am at this point today...If this is the debate you all want to have about ethics ... I am sure the Clintons and the American people want that to be the debate

Lets have it.

Posted by: dl | Mar 5, 2008 3:47:06 PM

How things have changed, first Obama said, he only works for 5 hours in a related lawsuit by his law firm (he worked there) for Tony Rezko, know they are long friends for over 20 years. Second, He said no meeting was perform with any canadian official, then a memo surfaced stating the contrary. Third, now he is more vetted than HRC, What's he thinking about?
FISHY UH !!!

Posted by: Miguel | Mar 5, 2008 3:47:23 PM

LA, Barack Obama said his relationship with Tony Rezko was purely business.. "5 hrs" of work but we all know now that not only they were partness in a business related to Obama's house but also took Rezko for a 'tour' prior to buying the house. A lie is a lie.

Posted by: Tony | Mar 5, 2008 3:47:39 PM

I AM JUST WONDERING IF AXELROD IS RELATED TO AL ROVE?

Posted by: Sam Lim | Mar 5, 2008 3:47:43 PM

it doesn't matter dogsoldier, hillary will lose anyway lol

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 3:48:12 PM

Actually, LA, the Canadian Government apologized for the leaked memo and NOT the contents of the memo itself. Just one of those facts you spoke about yesterday.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 5, 2008 3:49:31 PM

Well, as long as demands are being made to release documents, let's hold that thought.

I, along with many others, would like to read Michelle Obama's senior thesis she wrote while at Princeton.

The release date for the Michelle Obama's thesis is tentatively set for one day after election day, November 5, 2008. How convenient!

In the interest of fair play and full disclosure, why not release the thesis the same time Senator Clinton releases her documents?

While Mrs. Obama is not running for office, election of the Senator would make her the First Lady.

We surely would want any skeletons Mrs. Obama and Princeton have to come out of the closet as soon as possible so that the electorate can be fully informed. Wouldn't we?

Now, if the Obama's or Axelrod don't think such a request is fair, perhaps Ken Starr should be called on to dig a little deeper.

Posted by: ken | Mar 5, 2008 3:50:00 PM

Shame on you, Obama! That is all you got now? After tons of big empty words, dirty politics are all you have? People already voted against you because of your integrity problem. Playing dirty politics like a republican won't save you.

Why don't you tell us:
What are you hiding from us when you bought a house from Tony Rezko for $300,000 (!) below the market value?
What are you hiding from us when you casted over 100 'abstain' votes?
What are you hiding from us about your true religion?
What are you hiding from us when your wife got a 300% salary increase?
What are you hiding from us when you missed all the hearings of Senate Foreign Relations Committee?

Shame on you, Obama!

Posted by: UdontHaveCredits | Mar 5, 2008 3:50:16 PM

??

Nice try Obama. The vetting started 30 years ago in Arkansas. Don't you remember that she had a special prosecutor assigned to her at birth?

You my orator friend, need the vetting.

You don't scare anyone away from Hillary. You are the weak candidate.

Posted by: Brian | Mar 5, 2008 3:50:58 PM

Sam Lim:

Uh...Who is "Al Rove"? Is he Karl Rove's long lost twin separated at birth??

Or, were you referring to Al Roker??

Posted by: Moneyman | Mar 5, 2008 3:50:58 PM

Moneyman, I might be an idiot but he still LIED & LOST! Truth doesn't need to be 'deep' but just the truth.

Posted by: Tony | Mar 5, 2008 3:51:23 PM

now there YOU go dogsoldier lololol

so you're telling me they didn't apologize and backup Obamas response??

please don't make me believe you are just as dishonest as tony...

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 3:51:51 PM

It's all about Obama's off-shore accounts and aliases and money in his wife's family name. Just a matter of time

Posted by: Jill Mitchell | Mar 5, 2008 3:51:59 PM

Go get her lots of dirty laundry to come out ...Her returns ,her money is also dirty this is giving them time to hide it into a secret trust like it was before.They are the most under handed two I have ever seen.The time for her White House stay should have been ready years ago but again they have to hide it Dirty money ,dirty peple and if you think she will ever see the White house think again for the rep.will have a field day with her dirty laundry.Billy boy is a peoson I never want to see in politics again.

Posted by: honest | Mar 5, 2008 3:54:20 PM

Look, if we all say we are democrats, which may well be questionable in and of itself, how can Hillary or Obama win the White House if democrats exclude Fl and Mich? Right now the republicans have a complete free run in both states without having to work for it? Currently the voter in FL and Mich are furious at democrats and I don't blame them. We MUST count them or have a do over.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 5, 2008 3:54:48 PM

LOL!!

There you go again Tony....using that deep thinking. Rather than just accusing people of lying...back it up with the proven FACTS (TRUTH)!!

That's what will convince people you are correct when you say he "LIED & LOST".

Posted by: Moneyman | Mar 5, 2008 3:55:42 PM

lololol Rezko is really burning the hillary sheeples brain cells

y'all are too funny.

with the list of scandals that bill and hillary have, looks like THEY have the integrity problem. They had it back in the 90s and STILL have it.

but not to worry, she won't win
awwwwww, and after all this time she was just waiting for her coronation. That dang Obama (place badword here) just messed it up for her lol that's why she was caught off balance after Feb 5th....what a manager she is! And she should manage the country??? lol Not!

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 3:56:39 PM

Question: How many independent voters will be so fed up with the negative campaigning and infighting of the Dems that they vote for McCain, or even Nader? The Independents who voted for McCain will surely not change their minds about their candidate.

Posted by: Don | Mar 5, 2008 3:57:16 PM

Jill Mitchell:

REALLY??
"It's all about Obama's off-shore accounts and aliases and money in his wife's family name. Just a matter of time"

REALLY???

Please take off that tin foil hat...it clashes with that sheeple look on your face...

Posted by: Moneyman | Mar 5, 2008 3:58:20 PM

With regards to vetting Hillary truly has not been vetted via the Obama campaign. I am a Obama suporter and can't wait for all of the 'junk in the trunk' of Bill Clinton to be revealed since he has been globe trotting in the private jets of arab millionaire businessmen and the like and the millions of dollars in fees, honorarians, multinational boards he sits on that pay him millions a year. And don't forget that Arkansas has more billionaires than any state in the union. How much of that money before and since his presidency do you think he will have show appreciation for once Hillary is in the White House? So, like the Obama camp said let the vetting begin.

Posted by: Mike | Mar 5, 2008 3:58:29 PM

pure hillary....if you can't make something stick, just create something lol look how long it will take for them to investigate it, and at the same time calling the person a liar

keep looking people....I'm sure with all of you enrolled in Scooby-Doo Investigations, you'll come up with something. I have faith in you!

=ctfu=

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 4:00:19 PM

SINCE SENATOR OBAMA LOST IN THE BIG STATE: OHIO AND TEXAS. NOW THEY ARE CONTEMPLATING TO HAVE A DEBATE.

ARE YOU KIDDING? VOTERS ALREADY KNOW WHAT THEY NEED TO KNOW ABOUT SENATOR OBAMA.

BUT STILL THERE IS STILL HOPE FOR HIM. THE VICE PRESIDENT TICKET UNDER THE WINGS OF SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON THAT WILL GIVE HIM A GOOD 8 YEARS EXPERIENCE AND THEN HE CAN RUN AS PRESIDENT AND HAVE OPRAH WINFREY AS HIS VICE-PRESIDENT THAT FOR SURE WILL WINNING TICKET FOR YEAR 2017.

Posted by: Sam Lim | Mar 5, 2008 4:00:34 PM

Why don't you all google "Clintons" and "Scandals" and see the reams of unanswered questions and people chomping at the bit to bring it all up again.

and although you all like to say none of it took her down...all of them helped take down the democratic party in 2000. ...or do we all have that short of memories.

Most of those scandals, as much as you all would like to say they were vetted and put to rest...really just went away because a new scandal came up...or convictions were made or somebody mysteriously or unexpectedly died.

...and with Hillary's numbers each one of those is going to be trotted out several times a day if she is the nominee.


Posted by: dl | Mar 5, 2008 4:00:52 PM

LA I always tell the truth except for when I lie. No lie about the Canadian Government however. No doubt it was word play on their part because they're trying to get themselves out of the American election. But they did not apologize for the content of memo, nor the facts of said memo. CTV still stands by story and have a copy of said memo. Up to now the Canadian Government is desperately trying to make it all go away.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 5, 2008 4:02:04 PM

I really don't know how come some of you cant ask yourself why would anyone buy a lot of land not big enough to build a house put up a fence with a gate then make a garden next to someones house to beautify their property which they do not own and have no relationship with the owners of the said house at all?

What is even funnier then have the mans gardener cutting the grass regularly, so exactly when is the owner of this piece of land going to enjoy this wonderful garden?

Stranger than that is access to the said garden is via the property that the house is standing on. Either the owner of this lot of land loves to waste money because he has a lot of it or he is a total idiot.

Posted by: SJ | Mar 5, 2008 4:02:24 PM

Jill,

I, too, have heard mention of the off-shore accounts with aliases that have been linked to Senator Obama through Tony Rezko. We should see more of that surface as Rezko's attorneys bargain for less jail time for their client.

The aspects of Michelle Obama being directly involved also pose some interesting questions. Mrs. Obama undoubtedly played a significant role, and being an attorney, she can't claim innocence.

One more reason to get all of the Michelle Obama papers out for public scrutiny before any more primaries are held.

Posted by: ken | Mar 5, 2008 4:02:28 PM

GODISNOTREAL:

Nice name by the way since your God is anything with the label "Democrat" or "Socialism" on it. Your God is the State!!

As for a unified ticket, Hillary as said on GMA: "But of course we have to decide who is on the top of the ticket."

I bet Bill hears that every night!!

Posted by: Moneyman | Mar 5, 2008 4:03:02 PM

if you do the same with barack obama and scandals...you get rezko...a trial that hasn't even happened and authorities say has nothing to do with him besides he knew the guy and had one real estate transaction that sounds funny. Which i admit needs to be answered ...

and interesting of note ...a lot of the clinton money scandals...the tax returns were a key piece of evidence against them.

Posted by: dl | Mar 5, 2008 4:03:43 PM

dl,here are a few moe names to add to you list..Many more left ,Greg Rhodes,Keith Mc Maskle,Brian Hanley,Tim Sakel,Sue Coleman,Barbara West,Stanley Higgins,Jerry Parks,Kevin Ives,Don Henry,James Mc Dougal Mary Mahoney and Vince Foster,,,Ask Clintons if they knew these people>>>>>>>>

Posted by: honest | Mar 5, 2008 4:05:29 PM

Dl it was the democratic congress members themselves who took down the democrats that years with their corruption scandals. Oh, how quick we forget.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 5, 2008 4:06:43 PM

SJ all that has to do with historic property/preservation in the city of Chicago. Maybe instead of just insinuating, when apparently you just don't know....go do some research, its free AND easy

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 4:07:05 PM

When you present yourself as standing above the crowd, you are setting yourself up to be held to a higher standard; and also for a harder fall! Senator Obama has had numerous chances to put these stories to rest immediately. He did not do so. He chose to first deny, then to acknowledge but still with reservations. This is not transparancy.
As to the 5 million Hillary Clinton lent her campaign; her campaign has said she made much for than that amount from the sale of her book. As to being vetted, can there be anyone on the planet who has been more vetted than the Clintons? She has answered readily when policy questions have been put to her. I am still waiting for the same type of concise answers from Senator Obama as to policy.