good job suzanne. sad to say but that is about the only way you can deal with them. it seems to be all they understand.

here is the rest of the link… could not get it to go http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/obama-party-by-dday-on-saturday-i… saturday-in-over.html

marjorie, obama has already introduced himself in the states by running in the primary… he has an incredible grass/net roots movement. check this out: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/obama-party-by-dday-on-saturday-i…

this is a piece from portfolio by matt cooper. matt’s wife mandy grunwald works in hilary’s campaign. Capital by Matt Cooper May 8 2008 11:23AM EDT The Last Clinton Election Bill and Hillary Clinton have been running for office since 1974. Thirty-four years later, it’s possible that Tuesday’s West Virginia primary could be the last Clinton election. Ever. It’s not at all clear to me that she’ll run for president again. After all, Barack Obama could win in November, and challenging a sitting president in her own party is virtually impossible. And there’s no guarantee that come 2012, when Hillary will be 65, she’ll choose to run for a third term in the U.S. Senate or seek the presidency again. After all, if the Democrats lose to John McCain this fall, it’s possible, but not likely, that they’ll flock to the Clintons for salvation. And the talk of Hillary becoming Senate Majority Leader seems far-flung now. Lots of Senate allies abandoned her. Think of Jay Rockefeller, the West Virginia Democratic senator who carried her health-care package in 1993. When notes from Clinton’s White House years were released by the National Archives earlier this year, they showed more than 100 meetings between the then-first lady and Rockefeller. He abandoned her to support Obama—and his state isn’t at all likely to vote for Obama, so it’s not like politics drove him to his decision. In that kind of atmosphere, it’s really hard to see Hillary becoming the top Democrat in the Senate. And so this is, quite possibly, the last Clinton election—Chelsea doesn’t look like she’s ready for the family business. One hesitates to say something like this, but it’s worth contemplating. If you take the Clinton brand out of politics, it’s worth asking how the Clintons changed the marketing and branding of politics. Bill Clinton’s sheer charisma is one of their most memorable legacies, yes. But the Clintons gave techniques to their successors. Among them: The War Room. The culture of the “war room” is something that was bound to be invented in an age of cable and the internet. The idea of rapid and immediate response was an inevitable consequence of the changing way we communicate, just as the traffic signal was a logical invention following the development of the automobile. Before 1992, the idea of fighting back against the most minor accusation with brute force was unthinkable. But the war room cut through the bureaucratic layers of a campaign by putting the top people in the same room all the time and giving them the capacity to respond. Alternative Media. When Bill Clinton went on the Arsenio Hall Show in 1992 and played the saxophone, it was a way of reintroducing himself to the public. The Clintons knew that in a modern age there was no reason to deal only with the political press. And so they opened themselves up to the morning TV shows and People magazine, paving the way for politicians to appear on The View and The Daily Show. Attack, attack, attack. The Clintons pounced on weaknesses in their opponents. Of course, that’s the nature of politics, but the Clintons did it to such a degree that it represented a difference in kind. They clobbered Paul Tsongas on entitlements, and they pummeled little Rick Lazio in the 2000 Senate race in New York for his statements about the upstate economy being good. In many ways, the reason why Obama prevails is that you can’t attack him with the same vigor. The first African American with a real chance of becoming president was, by definition, going to be a guarded, if not sainted, figure in the hearts of blacks, as well as white liberals, so the Clintons needed a new, more gentle needling technique. They couldn’t find one. Ready for Reagan, not Kos. If you were a liberal who came to Arkansas in 1974 to run for office, you’d learn a few things. You’d learn how not to offend sensibilities about guns and religion. You’d learn to navigate a conservative culture. You’d wind up heading the Democratic Leadership Council because you knew traditional liberalism was toxic in the South. The Clintons understood how liberals could navigate in the age of Ronald Reagan, and it made them the logical candidates of the ’80s and ’90s. By the time Hillary ran for president, when liberal blogs like the Daily Kos helped set the agenda, the tide had shifted dramatically in the party—liberals were no longer defensive. In that atmosphere, Hillary’s prowar vote on Iraq was deadly unless it was followed by some degree of contrition. But she came from an era when you didn’t admit to a mistake lest the Republicans pummel you with it, and so she was stuck with her war vote and the prevaricating that followed. It burdened her throughout the campaign, and it cut to the quick her argument for her experience. Obama could justifiably question whether experience trumped judgment. The Clintons brought other qualities to politics, including an ability to make policy sexy. Bill Clinton won in ‘92 on the strength of being the best-prepared and most knowledgeable candidate about policy. Even as he goes on to beat Clinton, Obama’s the inheritor of much of the Clinton style and approach to politics.

uh, lw… hillary is telling him we are thinking of ‘obliterating’ his country. this might account for his angst.

why aren’t my posts going where they should? this was in response to the iranian’s post.

ummm, yes, why should we give him any ‘air time’ its just his country we are planning to bomb, and we all saw what happened to what’s left of iraq?

hey renata… i would pay almost anything to see her go away.

wow, that post did not go where i wanted it to go. i was responding to suzannes post about 2 posts up the food chain.

suzanne, as david gergen said… paraphrasing here, ‘obama would have to hire a food taster!’ now much truth is said in jest. would you want the clntons watching your back if you were president and she and bill were vp’s? seriously tho, it would not work. their world views are diametrically opposed. she represents the ‘old’ washington, everything that he is running against. pragmatically, it sounds good, she would bring all of her supporters on board but, philosophically it just won’t wash.

suzanne, that was grrrreat!

for those of you who wish to vote for mccain; copied this from kos. ABORTION Hillary Clinton: Strong Pro-Choice * Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007) * Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006) * Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005) Barack Obama: Strong Pro-Choice * Voted against banning partial birth abortion. (Oct 2007) * Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007) * Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006) John McCain: Strong to Moderate Pro-Life * Supports repealing Roe v. Wade. (May 2007) * Voted YES on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006) * Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007) BUDGET & ECONOMY Hillary Clinton: Supports Federally Funded Programs and Government Intervention to Regulate Markets * Help people facing foreclosure; don’t just bail-out banks. (Aug 2007) * Voted NO on paying down federal debt by rating programs’ effectiveness. (Mar 2007) * Voted NO on $40B in reduced federal overall spending. (Dec 2005) Barack Obama: Supports Federally Funded Programs and Government Intervention to Regulate Markets * Regulate financial instruments to protect home mortgages. (Aug 2007) * Voted NO on paying down federal debt by rating programs’ effectiveness. (Mar 2007) * Voted NO on $40B in reduced federal overall spending. (Dec 2005) John McCain: Free Market Capitalist - Generally Opposes Federally Funded Government Programs * “it is not the duty of government to bail out and reward those who act irresponsibly, whether they are big banks or small borrowers” (March 2007) * Voted YES on $40B in reduced federal overall spending. (Dec 2005) * “Congress spends money like a drunken sailor.” (May 2007) EDUCATION Hillary Clinton: Supports Federal Funding of National Education Initiatives * Voted YES on shifting $11B from corporate tax loopholes to education. (Mar 2005) * Supports Universal pre-kindergarten (Aug 2007) * Voted YES on $5B for grants to local educational agencies. (Oct 2005) Barack Obama: Supports Federal Funding of National Education Initiatives * Voted YES on $5B for grants to local educational agencies. (Oct 2005) * Voted YES on shifting $11B from corporate tax loopholes to education. (Mar 2005) * Nationwide program to reconstruct crumbling school buildings. (Sep 2007) John McCain: Favors “School Choice” and Vouchers Over Federal Programs; Does Not Oppose Teaching Creationism in Public Schools * Charters, homeschooling, & vouchers are key to success. (Dec 2007) * Teaching creationism should be decided by school districts. (Jun 2007) * Voted NO on $5B for grants to local educational agencies. (Oct 2005) HEALTH CARE Hillary Clinton: Supports a Government Sponsored National Health Care Program with Mandates * Universal health care coverage by the end of second term. (Feb 2007) * American Health Choices Plan: keep yours or pick Congress’. (Sep 2007) * Voted YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D. (Apr 2007) Barack Obama: Supports a Government Sponsored National Health Care Program with Limited Mandates * Mandates Advocates mandates for health coverage of all children under the age of 18 * Proposes a federally funded healthcare like members of Congress have. (Sep 2007) * Voted YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D. (Apr 2007) John McCain: Opposes any form of Universal or Large-Scale Federally Funded Health Care * No mandated universal system; no mandated insurance coverage. (Jun 2006) * Supports tax-free medical savings accounts & tax credits. (Nov 2004) * Voted NO on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D. (Feb 2006) IRAQ WAR Hillary Clinton: Advocates Ending the War in Iraq and Withdrawing Troops * Absolutely oppose the war in Iraq. (Oct 2007) * Deauthorize Iraq war, and don’t grant new war authority. (Jun 2007) * Goal to remove all troops from Iraq by 2013, but no pledge. (Sep 2007) Barack Obama: Advocates Ending the War in Iraq and Withdrawing Troops * Opposed the resolution authorizing the President to go to war. (Jul 2004) * Surge has not succeeded because it ignores political issues. (Sep 2007) * Hopes to remove all troops from Iraq by 2013, but no pledge. (Sep 2007) John McCain: Favors Remaining in Iraq Until “The Mission is Finished” (i.e., 100 Years) * Democrats proposing failure in Iraq by withdrawing. (Sep 2007) * Surge is working; let it continue until it succeeds. (Sep 2007) * The Iraqi war was necessary, achievable and noble. (Aug 2004) or don’t you want to get confused by the issues?

why on earth is obama ‘offensive’ to middle america? what is iowa? as for your prediction; the super delegates were created to handle just this type of a fiasco!

maybe she can’t drop out now… maybe she made too many promises to too many people. check this out: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/36441.html