Last poll had Clinton up by 36% in Kentucky.

I don't think they are too impressed by Mr Obama and his hip hop style.

Keep counting that pop vote.

I guess the "bitter" small town folks made their "bitter" voices heard by "clinging" to their votes.

I hope the rest of the states follow suit! Michigan tried, but obama OPPRESSED our right to vote since he rejected our re-vote.

Gauranteed he will NOT get Michigans vote in November.

Just because the mainstream media thinks this issue is over. IT IS NOT OVAH!!

Why bother with Kentucky. It will never vote Demacratic ever!

I want a candidate who will give us Universal health Care similar to France and England.

I want a candidate who will make college tuition free for everyone, similar to France, and other European countries.

I want a candidate who will provide a living wage - $11.00 per hour.

I want a candidate who will turn this energy oil-crud business, into U.S.A. green based energy ideas - NO NUKES.

I want ... too much.

Poop - Time to move to Canada.

Senator Obama is an arrogant fool when it comes to rural Ameica and hard-working Americans. After all, he is from South Chicago where gangs, crimes, drugs and handouts of other people's money reign as supreme. He did nothing to help this district when he had the chance other than legislate more hand-outs to irresponsible people. Bet he never washed dishes or cleaned office floors to put food on his table. He grew up with other people paying his way and patting him on the back. He is what most Americans would call a "spoil brat". Usually, people outgrow this by age 45, but in his case it becomes more pronounced as time goes by. He thinks he deserves to be President--not from all the good things he has done for America but just because he is Barack Obama and he wants the power. Maybe he should just go back to South Chicago, get between gang members with their guns, put up his hand and say, hey, fella, let's unite.

Come on a Republican state senator McCain does not even veil his planted questions.

Hey don't count Ky out just yet. They will hand him his head on a platter.
67% to 33% that's a whale of a difference. We have 60 delegates. How many does she pick up and how many does he get out of that. Better do the math people, plus add to the popular vote. I can promise you we are fired up and ready down here, so come on down Obama, we have a message for you here too, come back later.

It's ok to oppose a candidate, but there is nothing here but hate.

NO, Kevin, I don't think you have an insurmountable lead.

It's ok to oppose a candidate, but there is nothing here but hate.

You OBAMA Get out of the race. You can win the general election in novemeber.. Just get out of the race. You don't have enough experiecne and vision.

People of america should vote for either Mccain or clint.

Kevin - The math? The math says one half of all democrats refuse to support Obama, period. No now, not ever. How's that for math? BTW, good luck with FL and MI voters.

Obama should thank those new registerd voters in Penn and let him survive only 10% defeat....

No doubt Obama will do the same thing in KY..

However, those "new voters" will be returned to their orignal base in GE, guess where they came from....Reps....

So it is clear Obama has no way to win Penn and KY in GE...

It's really sad that these people Obama called 'bitter' can't see where their real resources lie - WITH OBAMA !!!!!!!!!!! Obama is the only one that will lift a finger on your behalf. Hillary doens't misspeak ... great - she only lies. Hmmm ... tough choice, a misspeaker vs a liar. To these voters, please vote for McCain - and in 4 years you'll be bitter for real !!!

Kevin,

Please don't fall in love with your Polls... It is very decieved based on a few hundreds of people....

One typical example: Kerry was supposed to beat Bush by POLL in 2004......Al Gore was supposed to beat Bush by POLL in 2000....

The race is competitive and 50+1 will consider a win.....

Obama has no way to win over white states because majority of white won't support him because of his race: admit or not...He could not even win white votes in his own party, how can he beat rep with majority white support????

If you think the DNC will turn over the nominaton to someone they know will lose while there is another candidate waiting in the wings who has a better shot at getting into the White House, then you are truly fooling yourselves.

And let's say Obama wins the White House in November. Will Congress then bow down to him and suddenly turn all nice - eagerly joining the coalitions Obama envisions as a part of his success? WRONG --- Hillary will be running against him for the next 4 years.

It's lucky, lots of new voters and young voters voted for Obama, those people were not involved in politics much enough, they didn't know Obama enough, they were fooled by Obama's hyperthetical image and fantastic 'change' concept. Otherwise, Obama would have been defeated more.

Obama not only lacks of experience, but also lacks of self-knowledge.

He should get out now. Otherwise, he will waste more money, waste more rural town people's money.

Long but worth the read, every statement footnoted:
Just Words: Senator Obama’s Record of Exaggerations & Misstatements (**Various noted sources)
Sen. Obama consistently and falsely claims that he was a law professor. The Sun-Times reported that, “Several direct-mail pieces issued for Obama’s primary [Senate] campaign said he was a law professor at the University of Chicago. He is not. He is a senior lecturer (now on leave) at the school. In academia, there is a vast difference between the two titles. Details matter.” In academia, there’s a significant difference: professors have tenure while lecturers do not. [Hotline Blog, 4/9/07; Chicago Sun-Times, 8/8/04]

Obama claimed credit for nuclear leak legislation that never passed. “Obama scolded Exelon and federal regulators for inaction and introduced a bill to require all plant owners to notify state and local authorities immediately of even small leaks. He has boasted of it on the campaign trail, telling a crowd in Iowa in December that it was ‘the only nuclear legislation that I’ve passed.’ ‘I just did that last year,’ he said, to murmurs of approval. A close look at the path his legislation took tells a very different story. While he initially fought to advance his bill, even holding up a presidential nomination to try to force a hearing on it, Mr. Obama eventually rewrote it to reflect changes sought by Senate Republicans, Exelon and nuclear regulators. The new bill removed language mandating prompt reporting and simply offered guidance to regulators, whom it charged with addressing the issue of unreported leaks. Those revisions propelled the bill through a crucial committee. But, contrary to Mr. Obama’s comments in Iowa, it ultimately died amid parliamentary wrangling in the full Senate.” [New York Times, 2/2/08]

Obama misspoke about his being conceived because of Selma. “Mr. Obama relayed a story of how his Kenyan father and his Kansan mother fell in love because of the tumult of Selma, but he was born in 1961, four years before the confrontation at Selma took place. When asked later, Mr. Obama clarified himself, saying: ‘I meant the whole civil rights movement.’” [New York Times, 3/5/07]

LA Times: Fellow organizers say Sen. Obama took too much credit for his community organizing efforts. “As the 24-year-old mentor to public housing residents, Obama says he initiated and led efforts that thrust Altgeld’s asbestos problem into the headlines, pushing city officials to call hearings and a reluctant housing authority to start a cleanup. But others tell the story much differently. They say Obama did not play the singular role in the asbestos episode that he portrays in the best-selling memoir ‘Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance.’ Credit for pushing officials to deal with the cancer-causing substance, according to interviews and news accounts from that period, also goes to a well-known preexisting group at Altgeld Gardens and to a local newspaper called the Chicago Reporter. Obama does not mention either one in his book.” [Los Angeles Times, 2/19/07]

Chicago Tribune: Obama’s assertion that nobody had indications Rezko was engaging in wrongdoing ’strains credulity.’ “…Obama has been too self-exculpatory. His assertion in network TV interviews last week that nobody had indications Rezko was engaging in wrongdoing strains credulity: Tribune stories linked Rezko to questionable fundraising for Gov. Rod Blagojevich in 2004 - more than a year before the adjacent home and property purchases by the Obamas and the Rezkos.” [Chicago Tribune editorial, 1/27/08]

Obama was forced to revise his assertion that lobbyists ‘won’t work in my White House.’ “White House hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was forced to revise a critical stump line of his on Saturday - a flat declaration that lobbyists ‘won’t work in my White House’ after it turned out his own written plan says they could, with some restrictions… After being challenged on the accuracy of what he has been saying - in contrast to his written pledge - at a news conference Saturday in Waterloo, Obama immediately softened what had been his hard line in his next stump speech.” [Chicago Sun-Times, 12/16/07]

FactCheck.org: ‘Selective, embellished and out-of-context quotes from newspapers pump up Obama’s health plan.’ “Obama’s ad touting his health care plan quotes phrases from newspaper articles and an editorial, but makes them sound more laudatory and authoritative than they actually are. It attributes to The Washington Post a line saying Obama’s plan would save families about $2,500. But the Post was citing the estimate of the Obama campaign and didn’t analyze the purported savings independently. It claims that “experts” say Obama’s plan is “the best.” “Experts” turn out to be editorial writers at the Iowa City Press-Citizen - who, for all their talents, aren’t actual experts in the field. It quotes yet another newspaper saying Obama’s plan “guarantees coverage for all Americans,” neglecting to mention that, as the article makes clear, it’s only Clinton’s and Edwards’ plans that would require coverage for everyone, while Obama’s would allow individuals to buy in if they wanted to.” [FactCheck.org, 1/3/08]

Sen. Obama said ‘I passed a law that put Illinois on a path to universal coverage,’ but Obama health care legislation merely set up a task force. ”As a state senator, I brought Republicans and Democrats together to pass legislation insuring 20,000 more children. And 65,000 more adults received health care…And I passed a law that put Illinois on a path to universal coverage.” The State Journal-Register reported in 2004 that “The [Illinois State] Senate squeaked out a controversial bill along party lines Wednesday to create a task force to study health-care reform in Illinois. […] In its original form, the bill required the state to offer universal health care by 2007. That put a ‘cloud’ over the legislation, said Sen. Dale Righter, R-Mattoon. Under the latest version, the 29-member task force would hold at least five public hearings next year.” [Obama Health Care speech, 5/29/07; State Journal-Register, 5/20/04]

ABC News: ‘Obama…seemed to exaggerate the legislative progress he made’ on ethics reform. “ABC News’ Teddy Davis Reports: During Monday’s Democratic presidential debate, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., seemed to exaggerate the legislative progress he has made on disclosure of “bundlers,” those individuals who aggregate their influence with the candidate they support by collecting $2,300 checks from a wide network of wealthy friends and associates. When former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel alleged that Obama had 134 bundlers, Obama responded by telling Gravel that the reason he knows how many bundlers he has raising money for him is “because I helped push through a law this past session to disclose that.” Earlier this year, Obama sponsored an amendment [sic] in the Senate requiring lobbyists to disclose the candidates for whom they bundle. Obama’s amendment would not, however, require candidates to release the names of their bundlers. What’s more, although Obama’s amendment was agreed to in the Senate by unanimous consent, the measure never became law as Obama seemed to suggest. Gravel and the rest of the public know how many bundlers Obama has not because of a ‘law’ that the Illinois Democrat has ‘pushed through’ but because Obama voluntarily discloses that information.” [ABC News, 7/23/07]

Obama drastically overstated Kansas tornado deaths during campaign appearance. “When Sen. Barack Obama exaggerated the death toll of the tornado in Greensburg, Kan, during his visit to Richmond yesterday, The Associated Press headline rapidly evolved from ‘Obama visits former Confederate capital for fundraiser’ to ‘Obama rips Bush on Iraq war at Richmond fundraiser’ to ‘Weary Obama criticizes Bush on Iraq, drastically overstates Kansas tornado death toll’ to ‘Obama drastically overstates Kansas tornado deaths during campaign appearance.’ Drudge made it a banner, ensuring no reporter would miss it. [politico.com, 5/9/07]

Obama may be "short" on the donations, but certainly not so on "words" He can go "long" on "embellishment"!
With Thanks to Jane

The big questions remain unanswered that cut to the core of Obama's credibility, character and judgment:

Mr. Obama, if you truly believe in a united America and are "post racial," why for the last 25 years have you aligned yourself and your family with the hateful, anti-America, anti-white, anti-semitic rhetoric of Jeremiah Wright and the Black Nationalist movement?

Mr. Obama, if you are truly the great uniter, why have you donated tens of thousands of dollars, including $26,000 last year alone, to Jeremiah Wright to further his message of hate and diviseness?

Mr. Obama, why did it take the media and plummeting poll numbers to jolt you out of what can only be described as a racist stupor to address, however inadequately, your association with racism and hate?

Mr. Obama?