« Obama Wins in Iowa -- Again | Main | Clinton on Economy: 'We Are In The Soup' »

Obama Campaign on Michigan and Transparency

Share

March 16, 2008 2:41 PM

ABC's John Cochran and Sunlen Miller report: On a conference call with reporters, the Obama campaign denied that they are trying to block a Michigan re-do primary because of fear that Obama can not win there.

“We’re not trying to block anything, we’re trying to insure we have a fair and reasonable process that reflects the rules of the party and will allow the states to  be represented at the convention,” Sen. Barack Obama’s chief strategist David Axelrod said.

He expressed confidence in Obama’s chances if a re-vote is approved. “Even without our names on the ballot, some 40 percent of more of the voters there chose to vote themselves undeclared, which I think is, with no campaign and no effort on our part, a reflection of the strength on our part that we have there.”

Axelrod said that the Obama campaign’s view on a fair redo is important in the process, and they are looking at the Michigan proposal of a June 3rd primary, to see how things evolve this week.

He said that the campaign would like to make sure that whatever is agreed to is  “reasonable, is practical, can be done fairly, and that goes to who can participate in the primary, how the primary is set up and how feasible it is to do it in a way that the results are beyond question.”

Axelrod agreed with Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s remarks on ABC’s “This Week,” that superdelegates should not go against what elected delegates are committed to. “It would be very, very disruptive to the party, I think, if at the end of the process one candidate finished with a significant lead in delegates and party leaders overturned that.”

He added that this is a widely held view in the Democratic party and that no one wants to see “chicanery at the end to change those rules … to advantage a candidate who didn’t do as well.”

Along with communications director Robert Gibbs, Axelrod called for more transparency from the Clinton campaign, laying out four areas where they believe gaps have to be filled in on Sen. Hillary Clinton’s records.

They called on Clinton to release her full tax returns, all earmark requests, the names of all donors to the Clinton foundation and the Clinton library, as well as all records from the Clinton library to be released.

Gibbs ended by asking, “What is Sen. Clinton hiding and what is lurking in those documents that she believes voters don’t have a right to know?”

March 16, 2008 in Obama, Barack | Permalink | User Comments (77)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/27149452

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Obama Campaign on Michigan and Transparency :

User Comments

Michigan for Obama. Transparency and democracy are essential. Clinton has to open the books for taxes, pardons, library, foundation, etc. Is she still going to build this museum for the Woodstock-Hippies?

Posted by: BKMC | Mar 16, 2008 2:52:53 PM

Worse than not releasing records that she should release, is the way Hillary talks as if she is being transparent, while she and her husband's lawyers do everything they can to throw up roadblocks. Part of the argument is transparency, but another important part is that they are arrogant, condescending phonies. This is what will move lunch bucket Dems, more than high-minded talk of "transparency"

Posted by: Chaz Lamb | Mar 16, 2008 2:57:55 PM

Michigan should decide what it wants without any campaign's veto.

Everyone following this knows that obama's camp is blocking the votes from coutning or being recast in Fl and MI.

They need to let the American people en masse know what's going on and make their own decisions take it to the DNC and let the campaigns file their objections in public if they have them.

Enough double speak from Obama.

Posted by: s.b. | Mar 16, 2008 3:08:03 PM

If Obama thought he'd win Michigan, he'd be all for a re-vote. Obama's campaign is nothing but words, hypocritical ones. He wants transparency, tell us about how Rezso bought his house for him. Are maybe he can assure us that he never heard sermons during the twenty years he spent at Wright's church.

Posted by: JR | Mar 16, 2008 3:12:25 PM

JR
I do hope we do remember the 40% uncommitted against Hillary in Michigan also that very nice picture where Rezko was in the middle of the very first couple of the US: Bill and Hillary Clinton. Are we running away from Rezko today after Ed Randell has received plenty money from him when campaigning for PA governorship? Putting Obama and Wright in the same box is very hard to do, they are not identica, have not lived same experiences and do not have same views and vision for America. Voting for Obama is voting for CHANGE, voting for a better America which will lead the world, because the world is waiting for him to lead. OBAMA08

Posted by: BKMC | Mar 16, 2008 3:21:55 PM

People--Obama needs to quit his church!! Wright MAY have quit--but their mission statement is still the same. Obama needs to atleast give the impression that he is for ALL voters!!

Posted by: I LOVE MY COACH PURSE | Mar 16, 2008 3:28:52 PM

Im sorry in Michigan Barack has a huge support among all folks. Im white and will support Barack. We are very familiar with Hillary and her scadals.

Posted by: MARK | Mar 16, 2008 3:30:12 PM


Hillary's tax returns are very, very important to the voters. This will show how trasparency she has been.

One must wonder, she knew she will be one of the candidates, if she is organised, why didn't even prepare the library records ready!

Posted by: Peace | Mar 16, 2008 3:34:04 PM

chicanery at the end to change the rules? that's what Obama is seeking because the RULES say superdelegates can vote for whomever they choose

Posted by: max | Mar 16, 2008 3:37:13 PM

OBAMA campaign is beginning to show its MACHIAVELLIAN cracks. Let Florida re-vote. Let Michigan re-vote. This complies with the rules. Do not disenfranchise these voters. HILLARY CLINTON seems to be the only candidate standing up for the voters of Florida and Michigan. She is the only candidate with a plan for the economy, for health care, for security.

Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Mar 16, 2008 3:39:38 PM

BKMC

Just because 40% voted for undecided in Michigan doesn't mean they voted for Obama.

And I've got to say that I'm sick to death of hearing Change, Change, Change. Change for what? Oh I know "better", well change can be for the worse just as well as for good.

Posted by: JR | Mar 16, 2008 3:40:13 PM

HILLARY SHOULD RELEASE HER TAXES. WHAT IS THE DEAL!!!!! IM SOORY. SHE WILL SAY ANYTHING TO GET ELECTED!!SAD.

Posted by: Lynda E Evans | Mar 16, 2008 3:40:29 PM

Since some people love to compare Obama to Jesse Jackson, know that Jackson won Michigan in 1988. So I know Obama can.

Posted by: ROB | Mar 16, 2008 3:42:39 PM

The best defense is always a good offense. You don't think you can win in Michigan and Florida so you drag your feet and change the subject, bringing up Clinton's tax returns. The last time I checked the due date for tax returns is April 15.

Posted by: Firefighter | Mar 16, 2008 3:43:13 PM

Senator Obama speaks about honesty, transparency, character and judgement. If he believed in all of these things, why did it take him so long to sit down with reporters and talk about Rezko? Oh, and by the way, "how did 5 hours worth of work" become first $150000 raised by Rezko and now $250000 raised by Rezko? Why did he ask his "spiritual advisor and mentor" of 20 years, NOT to appear with him when he accounced his run for the presidency? Because he had never heard the inflamatory sermons? He says he uses the Rev Wright as a "sounding board", but after 20 years does not know what the Rev stands for or preaches about? Sorry, doesn't sound too much like honesty, transparency, character or judgement to me. Just my opinion, but I do not what someone with this judgement, or lack thereof, as my president! This is the Democratic party, how do you call yourself Democratic, if you refuse to count every vote???

Posted by: Michiel W | Mar 16, 2008 3:43:50 PM

Michiel W--I 100% agree with you!!

Posted by: I LOVE MY COACH PURSE | Mar 16, 2008 3:46:47 PM

Hillary and Bill are the most dis honest people I know. Its sad when she acts like shes the law. Im also a white Women from Michaigan, OKEMOS. Im a smart women and will vote with my brain not my heart,Im not voting for Hillary beacouse shes a female. Hillary represents the past. She is what is wrong woth America. She is dis-honest and we can not trust her. Lets be real folks. Lets not forget the scandals!!!! Bill back to the white house!!! NO WAY JOSE!!!!

Posted by: Barbra | Mar 16, 2008 3:47:16 PM

Hillary:

Release your tax returns
Explain why you lied about being a leader in the S-Chip legislation while you were first lady.
Explain why you lied about the "dangerous" trip to Bosnia.
Since you were a hands on first lady, explain your involvement in all the scandals in the White House
The minister thing was a nice little distration. Now, back to your scandals and lies. Let us focus on what's important.

Posted by: Ann C | Mar 16, 2008 3:55:33 PM

Firefighter...Hillary won't release her 2006 tax returns...they were due on April 15, 2007.

Posted by: Mike M. | Mar 16, 2008 3:56:25 PM

If Hillary thinks that she will get my vote becouse Im a women. She is flat out wrong. I will never vote for that women. I rather vote for Britney Spears. She is a very dis-honest women.

Posted by: Helen Krivicky | Mar 16, 2008 4:05:24 PM

They need a complete congressional Ivestigation On Obama

Posted by: seah | Mar 16, 2008 4:05:27 PM

I hope American continue to rejec the Clintons. I will never vore for them. I voted for McCain in the primary. I will vote for Barack in the general elections. Barack is the only one that has a true chance to win agaist McCain and folks thats a fact. The republicans are just waiting for her to realse all her scandals...beleive me the good old boys are going to break her in half.

Posted by: Virgina- | Mar 16, 2008 4:13:22 PM

Hillary Clinton is not hiding anything. She has many, many years of experience that is out in public domain for everyone to scrutinized and her records have been scrutinized in the past. It is Obama who has a shady past that the public does not know much about since the media has refused to dig deeper to reveal anything. The American public should be thankful that this race is lasting so long because it seems that we may have a chance to see exactly who this man say he is that is running for President. If the Obama campaign had its way, they would want Hillary Clinton to disappear quietly but his support is eroding as people learn more about him and Hillary is gaining ground with white men and Republicans while keeping the core constituents of the Democratic Party -- the working and middle class, women, the elderly and Latinos. African-Americans will come around once she is the nominee.

Posted by: Jane | Mar 16, 2008 4:13:44 PM

I can't believe the ignorant remarks about why people don't vote for Clinton! And the Obama campaign says Hillary's supporters are uneducated? I guess they have no substantial basis to not vote for her, so they throw out stupid reasons like not needing a dynasty or Bill's indiscretions. For those who compare Obama to Kennedy by the way, have you forgotten President Kennedy wasn't exactly faithful to his wife in the White House? That doesn't seem to change your mind regarding his Presidential qualifications however. If Obama gets elected, people who vote based on such logic deserve what you get, a totally unprepared, inexperienced, easily influenced President who will indeed continue to work with the old political types like Kennedy, Leahy, and Kerry who choose to support him now. And by the way, Obama's supporters seem to be big on double standards and cheap shots. If the Clinton's were close friends with someone like Rev. Wright for 20 years who claimed to be a close personal and spirtual adviser, I can just hear the uproar now! People in this country, including the superdelegates, had better wake up and smell the coffee or we are all in a lot of trouble.

Posted by: DWC | Mar 16, 2008 4:17:00 PM

The comments on here are crazy... Obama dragging his feet on Michigan when everybody knows Sen Clinton is havign just as many issues with that state...she wants them counted as is for goodness sake... Now if that is not just weird... "Michigan won't count" I think is her words just a month or so ago wasn't it. She has as much nervousness about that state (although this woman who suddenly is all about voters rights didn't think that much of the Michigan and Florida primaries when she signed the dang agreement...)...but she needs Florida and so she plays the "I am the only one who cares about these voters... This is all for herself...

The Florida and Michigan issue is a perfect example... She pretends now to care about the voters. WHY didn't she care when it counted.

... ...and they can't even get it together to vote within the state party.

This is four parties faults...the state leaders of the Democratic Party (because look at their state legislative notes...they were NOT forced into this and their constituents should hold them accountable first), Howard Dean, The republican Governor and party in Florida and Senator Hillary Clinton for playing this up for herself...not the voters and tearing those states apart and trying to pull one over on what her motives are.

...calling HIM Machiavellian... that's a good one...

Posted by: dl | Mar 16, 2008 4:19:39 PM

Obama knew about those sermons--the truth will come out.

Posted by: I LOVE MY COACH PURSE | Mar 16, 2008 4:25:51 PM

This man has shown some serious bad judgement. I have never been a supporter of Obama's and I will never be one. If he gets the nomination espaecially after what his Rev. has said I will vote McCain and my years of voting Democrat.

Posted by: Melissa | Mar 16, 2008 4:30:04 PM

I am so sick of people who say they are african Americans,jewish Americans,etc. etc.. You are either AMERICANS or NOT. Why do you people HATE America. If you have a child that is bad and needs help, you do not hate that child, you try and help and or change the child. If Africans HATE America then please get on the next boat and please take the hater OBAMA and his Hatefull church with you. AMERICANS DO NOT WANT HATERS LIKE OBAMA AND HIS RACIST CULT.

Posted by: freedom20082009 | Mar 16, 2008 4:30:31 PM

ah, my new favorite word from these bloggers against Obama, "Machiavellian" - sweet...and my next favorite thing to read is how sometimes an angry person blogs on sites like these that they have decided to switch from Obama to Hillary because of the latest news blurb...wow! that's great to anonymously declare such intentions on a public forum...maybe I will too! thanks and it's nice to see voters' convictions broken so easily by gossip rag...

look, let's get back to the business at hand. in the end, Pelosi's right, this is a delegate battle and whichever candidate has the most at the end of the primary season should win. it's not about a Superdelegate choosing based on the votes of their constituency, but based on the total delegate count. so this "argument" that, say, a John Kerry should vote for Hillary doesn't hold water. A Super in his position should vote for the candidate that leads in the total delegate count, per Nancy Pelosi. And not to ruffle any feathers, but that is going to be Obama by at least 100.

Obama 08

Posted by: Let's Get Real | Mar 16, 2008 4:39:13 PM

Barack Obama is far from being racist. Hes is proud to be an American, a father and a christian. He grew up with his coucasian/white part of the family. He was born in America., America is his native home. He is a remarkable man. Les not forget over 14 million people voted for him,,,,Not just white people, black people, Asian and latino. So stop the bigotry and the ignorance. Lets teach our children to love each other. To respect and honnor diversity. Lets not forget this nation was based on imigration.

Posted by: Marie Sue Ann | Mar 16, 2008 4:39:45 PM

It was Obama's choice to remove his name from the ballot.The votes should count as voted. Rev. Wright, Farrakhan and Rezco are all Obamakins. Would you like to be one??

Posted by: onenibble | Mar 16, 2008 4:43:45 PM

no, it wasn't Obama's "choice...please read the DNC campaign guidelines for Michigan in the wake of the primaries being moved up. it clearly says that each candidate could not participate and each candidate was told to remove their names...it's just happens that Hillary didn't and Obama did. just another example of how the Obama campaign is run.

Say what you want about the Pastor thing or the Rezko thing, but at least he is decisive and transparent when the moment calls for it. and we if we want to list Clinton scandals side-by-side with Obama "scandals", I'm sure she would win that total...at least she's ahead in something right?

Posted by: again, you sound so... | Mar 16, 2008 4:51:03 PM

Obama is a RACIST and he is not Proud to be an AMERICAN. He knew and agreed with his pastor and he wrote about it in his book. Take your head out of the sand. He is a liar and you will see more facts of this in the next 3 weeks. He was in church when his pastor preached hate of America and White People.

Posted by: freedom20082009 | Mar 16, 2008 4:51:28 PM

I agree we democrats should stop playing silly games. We need to pick our nominee and move on. Its a fair play Barack won more states than Hillarty. He won more of the popular vote, he has more delagetes and more pleadge delagates..So do the math and stop the denial. Back is the front runner and he deserves it. He campaing in states the Hillay said did not matter. So Im being a realist. I will not support onother failed policy of george Bush. I will support Barack Obama. In regards to the pastor issue. Well it was Hannity the realse this information to the main media. Fox are pro-republican and of course they are going to go after democrats so that they will have a better chance in Novemeber. Its all pure garbage. Barack cleary denounce and rejected his pastor and his view.

Posted by: Barbra | Mar 16, 2008 4:54:57 PM

YES IT WAS OBAMA'S CHOICE TO REMOVE HIS NAME FROM MICHIGAN AS IT WAS EDWARD'S CHOICE. THEY REMOVED THERE NAMES AND ASKED PEOPLE IN MICHIGAN TO VOTE UNDECIDED.

Posted by: freedom20082009 | Mar 16, 2008 5:00:36 PM

it wasn't a choice and I want you to find where it says it it's a choice to remove your name. and writing in all caps doesn't make it you right either...

Posted by: freedom is just another word for... | Mar 16, 2008 5:06:44 PM

If you are legally a person running for president it is your choice as always to either put your name on a ballot or remove it. After all this is America

Posted by: freedom20082009 | Mar 16, 2008 5:14:56 PM

This country spent millions and millions of dollars in Ken Starr's ridiculous hunt to find the Clintons guilty of something. This country went through a ridiculous impeachment process based on sex. Now, the Obama campaign, relying on those past negatives to fuel an anti-Hillary campaign and divert attention from Rezko, want the Clinton campaign to stop their campaign in order to give Obama material to sift through for more diversion from his own problems and his troubling double-talk. Hillary has been fully vetted; Obama has not, and the real issue now is whether or not he can be trusted with the highest office in the land.

He wants transparency alright, even though he has not given it to the American electorate. Michigan transparency? If he could have a caucus there, he would grab it. We know why. He can pack the caucuses with his base of the new young voters and the AA base. It's no wonder he does not prefer primaries, because the people know when someone is not believable. He thinks he is already nominated, but does he have the delegates needed. We still have a few more primaries. Besides, the electorate needs to know more about his character, and whether or not he is just a bunch of double-talk.

Posted by: georgia | Mar 16, 2008 5:26:22 PM

I don't care about her tax records at all. I don't even think Obama should have released his tax returns for the last 8 years. Just because he released his returns for the last 8 years doesnt mean she should. However, I would very much like to see then donor list of people who've contributed to her campaign and the list of people that have contributed to his charity and his library. If she really wants to be open, then let us see that stuff.....financial stuff is person and is none of our business, the other stuff is our business though.

Posted by: Sandra | Mar 16, 2008 5:26:43 PM

OHHHHHHHH I just read Obama is planning an attack against Hilly billy for all her goodies she has wanted the public to know, he is cleaning his slate and she is wild.....GO GET HER >>>could not happen to a better person nail her to the wall.

Posted by: h | Mar 16, 2008 5:34:03 PM

Hillary has been attack for years. People have spent Millions trying to prove that she is hiding something and after years of tring and millions of dollars they could prove NOTHING !

Posted by: freedom20082009 | Mar 16, 2008 5:41:06 PM

As far as Hillary not putting out the information that people want to see. She is going to wait as long as she can so that everyone will think that she is hiding something.When she releases all of her documents it will be such a disappointment as usual she is hiding NOTHING ! Obama better worry about all the things still in his closet because Hillary's has been gone over by the best and still Nothing !

Posted by: freedom20082009 | Mar 16, 2008 5:52:46 PM

How about Obama releasing his tax returns during the time he was in Illinois Senate and during the time he was with Rezko? He also needs to release a full list of his campaign donors before he can go about accusing his opponents of transparency. It is so dubious that one time he said Rezko contributed $10000, then $70000, then $150000, and then $250000. The number keeps going up, and what is next?

Posted by: Jeff | Mar 16, 2008 6:18:49 PM

Obama voted no on transparency in lobbying yet he tells voters he is for transparency and getting rid of lobbyist power in Washington? Wake up America... he is lying to you on the campaign trail.

Posted by: DCVoter | Mar 16, 2008 6:22:57 PM

Axelrod deserves twelve Pinocchio's. Obama has clearly stated..."a re-do in Michigan is not practical". If Axelrod is fibbing about that, what else are they fibbing about? They know, that if MI and FL have do overs, the chances are better that they will lose, but not necessarily certain. They are operating under the premise of "very little to gain...a lot more to lose" mentality. I noticed too, whenever things are going bad about Obama, they start throwing out the "transparency" issue to try and create a diversion. Now it turns out that as far as Rezco is concerned, the Obama campaign has been far from "transparent" themselves.

Posted by: KDH55 | Mar 16, 2008 6:24:56 PM

And before the Obamites say ooh he voted for a tougher bill... there are critics who say that second bill was not tougher. We as voters are not lawyers or political scientists who can sift through and scrutinize every bill. We have to cast our votes based on substance, voting records, judgement, credibility, and patriotism. Obama fails the tests for President both CIC and CEO/COO.

Posted by: DCVoter | Mar 16, 2008 6:26:43 PM

Sure Obama wants Michigan to have a revote now that the truth is finally starting to come out. America, wake up and smell the coffee. Obama doesn't want a revote in MI, FL, or his records brought out anymore than he wants Rezco, his pastor, earmarks, or anything else to come out for that matter. Doesn't he know by now if, it's negative information, all he has to do is look sweet and repute, denounce or deny it and the media won't bring it up again. What a plague on all of us, the mainstream media. FOX is turning out to be more fair in this election than nearly all the rest. Come on media, OB's not on the level on the Rev. Wright issue or anything else it now seems. He only speaks the truth when he gets caught in a lie or half truth. How much more is lingering out there for Republicans to mo-up the floor with him if, and that's a big "IF", he gets the nomination. God help us if he does! Our country needs "US" to stand-up for her now. Our future lingers in the balance of the impending primaries & general election. We need a President to restore our standing at home and abroad. We need Hillary, not inexperience and a very questionable past, and certainly not Senator more of the same, McCain.

Posted by: Mary O'Bryan | Mar 16, 2008 6:31:15 PM

Brian - even Obama admits transparent earmarks are the way we measure whether a Senator is doing their job and that they should be related to the bill. Every earmark on the defense bill submitted by Clinton was for increased technology for the military and our national defenses here at home. Obama submitted one earmark for disabled children (good but unrelated). This is how he does things... hide them in unrelated bills (pork) and then claims to be transparent? Take off the rose-colored glasses and take out the earplugs... he is lying again.

Posted by: DCVoter | Mar 16, 2008 6:33:12 PM

All this talk earlier about how the candidates should play nice in the primaries is hogwash. Doing that in the past has lead to the majority of elections being won by Republicans. We the voters deserve to have primary candidates vetted thoroughly and to see how they respond under pressure in the public eye. I say to the Clinton campaign... bring it on. We know all there is to know about Clinton and half the voters in the this pregame election still support her. If the party wants a chance to beat McCain the voters need to see what else we dont know about Obama. Tell us more!

Posted by: DCVoter | Mar 16, 2008 6:40:55 PM

Obama and the DNC should be concerned about the perception that THEY are not on board with making sure that Michigan and Florida voters have their voices heard. Due to time constraints, it's no longer going to be enough to say "let's see a doable proposal". We are watching - it's time to get to the table - all of you and come up with a unified plan. This is ridiculous. Sure, there's a management style that says some problems go away (so they don't have to be dealt with); this one though is not going away!

Posted by: where is the DNC? | Mar 16, 2008 6:46:21 PM

Russert this morning on MTP - otherwise known as the Weekly Obama infomercial - had a chart about how democrats think super delegates should approach their job (something to the effect of Should their vote be based on # of pledged delegates. Russert was all intent on showing that something on the order of 38% said "Yes". In his excitement, he failed to note that another way of looking at the numbers is that the "No" and "No opinion" numbers combined were in the 60 plus %. Clearly, democrats think that the super delegates should vote for the candidate who can win in November. Read the history of the role of the super delegates. That's their job.

Posted by: s. valenti | Mar 16, 2008 6:54:46 PM

It's not only Hillary's tax returns, she also refuses to release her 2,2 BILLION dollars in earmarks, and such a refuse is an 2,2 BILLION insult to American voters and tax payers. Hillary simply thinks she is above the law; Bill thought so before but got in serious trouble. Even if she were the frontrunner in this campaign, such refusals would cost her the nomination.

Posted by: Harriet | Mar 16, 2008 7:27:12 PM

OBAMA is not responsible for what Wright said, but he must be held responsible for supporting him financially, emotionally, verbally, and physically. It is the action, that damns him.

THIS MAN IS ASKING US TO IGNORE HIS PAST AND ONLY THINK OF THE FUTURE.

OBAMA is not responsible for what Wright said, but he must be held responsible for supporting him financially, emotionally, verbally, and physically. It is the action, that damns him. OBAMA thinks if he puts distance between himself and PASTOR WRIGHT---the story will disappear. Obama has contributed thousands of dollars to the church. When Obama announced his candidacy for President, he dropped Wright as a speaker (Obama knew then what Wright was spewing!). Pastor Wright was on Obama’s political campaign ‘spiritual advisory committee’ until YESTERDAY!

OBAMA thinks if he puts distance between himself and FARRAKHAN and all the money Farrakhan donated to his campaign ---the story will disappear. Wright gave Farrakhan a "lifetime achievement" award, and Obama lied in a debate saying it was for some community service Farrakhan did. Yesterday, Obama said he may have received more money in donations than previously reported.

OBAMA thinks if he puts distance between himself and REZKO and his Arab associates---the story will disappear. There is ample evidence that Rezko did favors for Obama. A million dollar home for three-hundred-thousand, plus the land next door. At first, Obama said he did a few hours of work for Rezko. Now, he admits he may have received about $250,000 from Rezko.
OBAMA thinks if he puts distance between himself and the NAFTA Meeting---the story will disappear. The Obama campaign admitted the meeting AFTER they were caught!

OBAMA thinks if he puts distance between himself and MICHELLE’S COMMENTS---the story will disappear. Read her college thesis.

OBAMA thinks if he puts distance between himself and Exelon, the country's largest nuclear plant operator. Obama's “Chief Political Strategist”, David Axelrod, has worked as a consultant to Exelon. Is this the history of the candidate who doesn't accept money from big business? How many other big companies are helping to raise these huge funds ($55 million in Feb)?

WE HAVE JUST OVER FOUR MORE MONTHS TO LEARN THE TRUTH ABOUT WHO BARAK HUSSEIN OBAMA REALLY IS. I'm sorry, but your past and your 20-year relationship with Jeremiah Wright, as well as relationships with others, tells me that you are not an AMERICA FIRST supporter. Heck, I knew (after 9-11) what his pastor was saying! Over the last year, he has been stretching out lies (a little at a time). His guilt is not just about his ‘association’ with others, it’s about all the lies he has told.

Posted by: proudamerican2008 | Mar 16, 2008 8:43:49 PM

Has anyone asked why McCain won't release his tax returns?

Posted by: Kansas Republican | Mar 16, 2008 8:50:38 PM

I have nothing against Black churches or TUCC.

Obama has lied to American youth on his past and ideologies. That is Obama's biggest problem. He believes in a Black Separatist Muslim philosophy(NOI).

I for one cannot knowingly follow/trust a person who tries to deceive voters in such a blatant manner by utterly underestimating our intelligence.

Posted by: MattOhio | Mar 16, 2008 9:34:06 PM

Wright said some things that were not factual. But the church crowd reacted positively to his message. Obama knew that Wright's message does not match what he hopes to accomplish. OTOH, Wright did not say those things constantly throughout all of his career. He also taught about Christ and Christian values. Can we blame Obama, if he stays in a church where he chooses to associate with a person that gives both messages. Obama's own message does not attempt to convince others to follow Wright's thinking. It is possible to be associated with people you disagree but you just need to know where you stand. I think Obama has been clear about that. Who amongst you can vouch for your pastors or people you associate with in all that they believe? Chill a bit people. I'd be more worried, if Obama defended Wright's message. He did NOT and so for me this is not a concern. Obviously, for others this is a concern. The Hillary supporters will continue to support her. For those that change their mind because of this Wright revelation, I would say consider for a moment that Hillary and/or John probably have the same flawed associations. If you don't think so, then be prepared to be disappointed.

Hillary offers a good experience, certainly better than Obama. But with that experience comes with it liabilities/negatives. Same with John McCain. With Obama, you'll have a different perspective and yes, he is newer at it and will probably make mistakes but I think he is smart enough to learn and he'll be around people that will help him. All these individuals are extraordinary, imho. Running the country is not a sprint (as in I'm ready on day one) but rather more like a marathon. If experience is the main qualification for the job, then McCain should be the choice, imho. Whoever is picked, s/he has to learn on the job, it is unavoidable. This nation has had great presidents without the experience.

Best wishes to all three candidates.

Posted by: Neutral | Mar 16, 2008 9:42:21 PM

COME ON PEOPLE WHEN ONE OF MY STUDENTS GET CAUGHT DOING SOMETHING THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE OR LIED ABOUT THEY STAR BLAMING OTHER PEOPLE AND HOW MANY OF YOU WERE WORKING IN 1993-2000 AND DOLLAR WAS WORTH A WHOLE LOT MORE THAN NOW. TELL US HOW CLINTONS ARE SO DISHONEST OTHER THAN BILL AND HIS FLINGS. AS THE SAYING GOES "THOSE WITHOUT SIN CAST THE FIRST STONE" OOPS SORRY THOSE OF US WHO WANT SOMETHING BETTER ARE UNEDUCATED WITH NO KARMA OR CA NOT OIL OUR WORDS TO EXCITE YOU SO YOU WILL FOLLOW ME WELL SO DID HILTER, LOOK WHAT HE CAUSED. OH BY THE WAY OBAMA IS ONLY HALF BLACK ANYONE EVER THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.AND EVERY SUNDAY IN CHURCH I NEVER HEAR ANYTHING THE PREACHER SAYS, THATS WHY I GO NOT TO HELP ME SPIRITUALLY WITH LOVE NOT HATRED, BUT I DO NOT LISTEN TO HER.

Posted by: MAMA | Mar 16, 2008 9:45:44 PM

The media loves to peddle the idea that throwing negatives about each other is the most effective way to change the outcome of an election. We buy it hook line and sinker. Then we also get disgusted with politicians attacking each other instead of paying attention to things that matter to us.

Look we all picked Bush based on supposedly his character. I leave it in your very capable intelligent mind to decide whether you think his policies have been good for ALL Americans.

Posted by: Neutral | Mar 16, 2008 10:08:06 PM

Barack will do well in Michigan. We welcome the opportunity to campaign there.

Posted by: Jim B | Mar 16, 2008 10:10:36 PM

Oh by the way, it's not this year's tax returns. It's last year's returns.

Posted by: Jim B | Mar 16, 2008 10:13:11 PM

Wow! The sad thing about this is if you were to go to any African American beauty shop, barber shop, kitchen table or front porch you would hear similar views on race and politics. It shows that up until this election, no one has cared to examine how Black people feel deep inside. Maybe our smiles have masked the pain that is inherent in every African American in this country. If Rev. Wright holds the views that he holds, has anyone stopped to ask why? Was he born with those views? What happened to shape his views and opinions?

There is something about living in a country where you were expected to assimilate. It feels the same as someone who is acceptable as long as they comply to what someone else says is okay but if they have an original idea, they are criticized. That's bondage, people. Maybe having to fight to reclaim one's rights in a country where one's culture and history was stripped away leaves some scars. I'm not condoning Rev. Wrights' views but I certainly understand them.

You see, the hard thing that all this is bringing to the forefront is that racial reconciliation is more than a thought or a notion. With our history, it cannot be easy. One has to examine one's own fears, biases and blind spots. In my opinion, White America has gotten spoiled by how African Americans have assimilated in this country. If we act as you do, you approve; if we don't, you disapprove. But don't be confused, just because we behave a certain way doesn't mean that we are reconciled. It just means we've learned to coexist. Though you might not like it ONLY a Barack Obama can bridge the gap and bring dignity to our race so that we can begin to heal and trust again. A Clinton can't do it and neither can a McCain. And if you truly want racial reconciliation, let this inspire a dialogue between you and a person of color and listen with your heart.

Posted by: Suzette Hinton | Mar 16, 2008 10:19:42 PM

Obama should dropout! There is no way he can when now. He has shown bad judgment!!! His pastor should be barred from the church!

Posted by: Pamela | Mar 16, 2008 10:20:21 PM

Obama should confess and exam his own record. He started with 5 hours of work for Rezko to $80,000, not $250,000. What is the truth? Obama sat in that church for 20 years with his wife who does not proud of America until now and listens to his racist pastor who hates his own country. I feel sorry for his daughters.

Posted by: V,CA | Mar 16, 2008 11:15:28 PM

First of all Michigan and Florida broke a rule by having the primaries earlier. Everyone, including Hillary agree not to campaign, so DCvoter, ether you are naive or have selected memory. Number 2: Remember the late Falwell said that homosexuality and feminism caused 9-11? Guess who was the keynote speaker? Mccain. So, where were Hannity and Limbaugh? OOPS i forgot selected memory.

Posted by: donis georgiou | Mar 17, 2008 1:09:45 AM

Hillary has been in the white house with her husband and monica, they should give another person chance.We love OBAMA.

Posted by: C.A | Mar 17, 2008 1:54:12 AM

Lets see Obamas tax returns for the years he was in the legislature in Illionois.After all Obama bought a 1.6 million dallor home funded 2 terms in the legislature,a run for House of Representatives,and the US senate.Four campaigns,22,000 to his church,and 20,000 a year per child to a private school.All on a full time state legislators pay and his part time stint as lecturer at University of Chicago.How about the money from Rezko for his campaign,Obama said it was 150,000 when its over 250,000,are Americans supposed to be stupid and not know that election finance laws require detailed lists of donors and amounts.Rezkos selling favors on the very board Obama was on now thats a coincidance.Then theres Obamas great pastor who spreads hate and anti American sermons.But Obama never heard his pastor say things like that in 20 years of attendance.Obama is sure that Americans are stupid and easily fooled hes wrong

Posted by: girlinvt | Mar 17, 2008 2:50:57 AM

In a country torn apart by war with a failing economy, a leader with the same great speaking style as Obama united half the country behind him, he had the ability to mesmerize his audience with whatever he was talking about, he said "He who owns the youth, owns the future", the country was Germany, the leader was Hitler... let us not make the mistake many germans made in their desparation for a better future and elect an unvetted candidate.

This election is about more than Obama's ability to mesmerize and energize voters. Clinton has a strong following that is energized behind her too. The difference is she has substance to go with it. She has a history that is sound. She is not a mystery to the voters. She doesnt ask us to trust her - she asks us to hold her accountable for what she has done and what she will do if she is elected President. Let the vetting nd the nomination process continue. The world is watching - let's make educated decisions based on a combination of voting records, campaign promises, judgement, credibility, patriotism, experience, qualifications, and electability. We cant afford to do any less - it is our responsibility to our country, our world, and our future.

Posted by: DCVoter | Mar 17, 2008 3:34:08 AM

Transparency where is his he is just hoping they don't redo the vote because if those people our smart Obama will lose. Obama had to know what his Pastor was preching as we say God hates ugly and that was ugly.

Posted by: Bishop | Mar 17, 2008 9:13:45 AM

To all you Clinton Toadies, Listen Up!
There can't be a re-vote or re-do in
Michigan since there was No Valid Vote
there the First Time!
That First Vote would Go Over Very Well
in Russia where Democracy is a Joke!
One Candidate on the Ballot is Not a
Valid Vote!
The Clintons and their supporters liked it because it dove-tailed with their
forced healthcare plan!
Garnished wages, rigged elections that's right out of Putin's playbook!
Maybe Hillary should run for president
in Russia where her ideas and methods
would be considered normal!

Posted by: reaganfan | Mar 17, 2008 12:34:25 PM

Obama decided to take his name off the ballot in Michigan. His supporters, as well as Edwards supporters told their supporters to vote for uncommitted, Hillary still won. Other Democratic contendoers still had their name on the ballot. In Florida, all the names were on the ballot, and Obama was the only democratic candidate who aired television commercials, Hillary won Florida. Do your research before you start posting non-transparent, fact-bendingposts. To compare a one-time picture of Rezko with then President Clinton and First Lady Clinton with a 17 year relationship with Rezko, and after Obama has finally admitted that he received $250,000 in donations from Rezko, is nothing more than grasping at straws. Hillary is the better candidate, she is smart, hard-working and has the experience!

Posted by: svsolis | Mar 17, 2008 1:17:19 PM

svsolis:
You should do some research!
What "experience" does Hillary have?
Barely more than 1 term in the U.S.
Senate? Being First Lady of Arkansas or
the U.S. doesn't count!
Please enlighten me, what "experience"
does Hillary Clinton have that would qualify her to be president of the
U.S.A.?

Posted by: reaganfan | Mar 17, 2008 1:24:11 PM

This is the obama camp trying to make people forget that obama is not qualified to be a nominee for the POTUS. All the Clinton stuff is just background noise to cover up the real truth.

Posted by: toby | Mar 17, 2008 2:25:37 PM

Actually, Mr. Axelrod, "chicanery" ,as you refer to, has been present throughout the Democratic selection process.

A better word for "chicanery" is "caucus."

Caucus can also be applied to misrepresentation, intimidation, and a host of other antonyms for democracy.

As far as Axelrod and Gibbs demanding to see Senator Clinton's paperwork, they will get what the Senator wants them to have and when the Senator wants them to have it.

A fair exchange for the donor list to President Bill Clinton's library would be the senior thesis by Michelle Obama while she was at Princeton.

But, if November 5th remains as the release date for the Obama papers, that date should serve as an acceptable time for the Clinton donor list.

Posted by: Ken | Mar 17, 2008 2:28:51 PM

i really dont understand how seemingly smart people can still think obama can win in november after the rev wrights statements and his incredulous claim that he did not know about them.also suddenly he remembers that rezko actually donated more money than he claimed the two other times he said he disclosed all of rezkos contributions.go ahead throw away the presidency to mcain by nominatng obama,he is unelectable now that his true past is comeing out,middle america wont vote for him now with wrights statements and his tacit approval of them by continuing to attend wrights church.

Posted by: don tufts | Mar 17, 2008 2:31:30 PM

If she is not hiding anything, then why can't she release that stuff now? I don't buy it. She is probably moving stuff around and trying to hid stuff. I wouldn't vote for this woman to save my arm.

Posted by: Ken | Mar 17, 2008 5:50:35 PM

Focusing on Mr. Obama and his church is just a silly distraction.

Are we to hold all catholics responsible for the exploitation of innocent young boys perpetrated