Today is the final straw. Clinton has destroyed her future in Democratic politics.

[TheWraith]

Voting for the war. Voting against banning land mines. Against banning cluster bombing of civilians. Torture. Kyl-Lieberman.

Race-baiting in the south. Bashing the caucus system. Trying to disenfranchise college students in Iowa. Dismissing red-state Democrats. Talking about stealing the election using party insiders to control the nomination. Mocking and denigrating those who choose to hope, and to try bringing new ideas and new participants into the political system.

Smears, lies, attacks, and now the ultimate straw, trying to use xenophobia and racism to secure victory riding on the back of bigotry and hatred.

Hillary Clinton has done more than lose the Democratic nomination: she's destroyed her future in Democratic politics. There was a time when, if she'd fought well and gracefully accepted the decision of the voters, she could easily have looked forward to a position of Senate Majority Leader, a governorship, or almost anything else she chose.

Now, she's going to go down in history as having tried to destroy our future candidate for president with scorched earth politics: if I can't have it, no one can. It's the exact same thing that Bush and Karl Rove employed in 2000 against John McCain--no tactic is too underhanded, no smear too vile, no action so disgusting that their conscience would prevent them rom doing it.

There was a time when I stood in front of Clinton over her war vote, Kyl-Lieberman, etcetera, teling my fellow DUers that yes, I disagree, but it's not as bad as all that.

But this is well beyond the simple facts of distasteful political compromise. This is vile behavior on a scale rarely seen even among Republicans, combined with a total self-centeredness that says it's really all about taking and holding power, not about the people. That's not the way Democrats are supposed to operate.

Considering her record, I no longer want Hillary Clinton representing me, either as a Democrat or as a citizen of the state of New York.

[Botany]

1. she has been in the gutter

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4759678

[Name removed]

72. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nikto]

164. Hillary's political advisors...

...should be drawn & quartered.


And after that, they really need to be punished severely.


Her advisors are moral scum just like so many repugs.
:grr: :nuke: :grr:

[bo tox]

167. How about this HUGE LIE?

For days Obama supporters have been claiming that Clinton
sent the Obama Photo to Drudge.
Well, here is post in Free Republic from February 23.
It shows the Musllim Photo. Among the comments is one
suggesting that it be sent to Drudge.
OK? You happy?
You guys are being brainwashed. This maniacle Hillary
hatred is way over the top.
This is Nazi Germany all over again dudes. This is how
Hilter did it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1975275/posts?page=151,50

[Oleladylib]

2. ABC news tonight..Obama..over 100 of his votes in Illinois were just "present"

oh yea, real leadership...Barry's butt is busted if he runs against McCain.

[Alexander]

3. 100....out of tens of thousands of votes. Not exactly earth-shattering.

An eight-year IL Senate career and the best you can do is come up with 100 present votes?

Pathetic.

[11 Bravo]

24. "Tens of thousands of votes"?

I have to question either your math skills or your honesty. You choose. Either you can't count or you're a liar.

[Laurab]

143. Actually, I think it was 4000, but still common practice.

The fact that they keep posting about the "present" votes IS kind of pathetic. They've got nothing...

[LiberalFighter]

163. It wasn't common practice for the state senate leader

[Labors of Hercules]

4. All he has to do is present the listing of EVERY OTHER Illinois state senator's voting record...

Every single one of them has over 100 present votes. THIS IS A NON-ISSUE. Period.

[timtom]

5. Hell, Let's get some REAL leaders in there

who voted for this insane invasion/occupation debacle. Now THAT's leadership!

[tabatha]

6. 100 out of 4,000.

Also, in Illinois present votes are a strategy.
I heard this discussed on talk radio.

Apparently one tool is to say that a bill is not bad enough for a no and it is not good enough for a yes - i.e. it needs some work, but keep it alive so that it does not die.

Hillary knows that - but she is misrepresenting it.

[SayitAintSo]

14. His peers in the state senate joked about him always being in the bathroom

during tough votes... i.e. voting present. And these were AA peers that reported this.

[tabatha]

20. Link for the bathroom quotes?

130/4000 = 0.0325 % of the time.
Very small.

[SayitAintSo]

22. See if this works...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=511901&in_page_id=1811

As one veteran of Chicago politics who very much did not want to be named said to me: "Thank God for Louisiana - their politics are even dirtier than ours."

He clearly remembered Obama's first steps on his political career. This involved merciless cunning.

Somehow, all of Obama's challengers made a mess of their nomination papers. They were all disqualified. Only Obama's papers, miraculously, were perfect. So he won the Democratic nomination, which in this part of the world means he won the seat.

The insider recalled: "I thought he was a very talented young man. He was smart, he was willing, he was principled and he worked hard.

"He went to Springfield and did not become part of the more tawdry aspects of the culture down there - alcohol and women.

But Obama quickly got another reputation. "He was always in the bathroom for the really tough votes. It was not courageous."

The source explained this simply. Barack Obama knew even then that he could one day live in the White House.

"I think he understood long ago that the future was limitless for him. He made decisions in his very early political life that would enable him to be a candidate who would have very broad appeal."

[tabatha]

58. Well, I don't know if I would put too much stock

into an anonymous source from a reporter from the UK - but I have heard that the Nuclear Bill he worked on it the Senate was tough and took a lot of hard work.

[ORDem]

60. ROTFLMAO!!!! The Daily Mail! OMG, why don't you start quoting the Enquirer? n/t

[Beacool]

100. Just as courageous as skipping the Kyle-Lieberman vote

because he alleged that he wasn't notified on time (funny that he & McCain were the only 2 senators who didn't show up for the vote). During the MoveOn ad controversy he abstained from voting. Hillary not only voted for it but Giuliani took out a full page ad bashing her for it. Who do the morons at MoveOn endorse? Yep, the guy who didn't even vote.

If he wins the presidency, I wonder how many times he'll be in the "bathroom" when the tough decisions need to be made.................

[intaglio]

104. Better'n voting FOR Kyle-Liebermann like someone we know n/t

[Beacool]

105. At least she had the guts to vote, not like the anointed one

who didn't say a blessed thing for 3 days before he started attacking her for it. It seems to be his pattern, abstain from voting and then bash those who actually had the balls to show up and vote.

Smoke and mirrors........

[intaglio]

109. You have your fantasies

I have mine, like the belief that politicians - like physicians - should "first do no harm"

[beezlebum]

117. voting for k/l

was not "gutsy," and is no more respectable than skipping the vote.

but you're right- at least she comes right out and votes for war...again.

[October]

159. They're really quite close in their voting record since he became senator

He has voted to continue funding the war...the one he keeps saying he's been against from the start.

So, how is that explained?

[SayitAintSo]

140. Thankyou.... My point exactly

"The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in the face of moral crisis maintain their neutrality."

---Aquinas

[RazBerryBeret]

166. or, a more recent incident.....

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) voted against immunity for telecoms, and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), voted to keep immunity in the bill. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) did not show up for the vote. All three candidates were in the Washington area Tuesday morning for the region's three primaries.

[greguganus]

123. The Daily Mail?

That shit's not good enough to line a bird cage with! :rofl:

[knight_of_the_star]

66. Just out of curiosity

What were those 100 votes he missed? Were they anything like Kyl-Lieberman?

[alllyingwhores]

81. That's 3.25%

[mrbluto]

99. What are you complaining about?

Doesn't your employer allow you a pass on 3.25% of your work?

Wouldn't you like to depend on a surgeon that only screws up on 3.25% of his or her patients?

How about an airline that has a 96.75% success rate for safe landings? For most airports that'd be, um, only one or two crashes a day.

If McDonalds had that sort of record there'd be only 32.5 million or so sub-standard burgers they would have served. I'm sure they'd still be successful.

Jeeze. You must be some kind of perfectionist to think that the salary and perks of being a US Senator makes it practical to make a decision on EVERY vote.

At least he was present. No lesss a luminary than Woody Allen would say he's done his part - as Woody says: "Eighty percent of success is showing up."

You're doing the typical liberal thing and letting the good be the enemy of the mediocre.

[mrbluto]

101. To be fair...

...I'd have to read more about a "present" vote and it's uses. It might be a very apt and defensible maneuver when serving one's constituency.

But it was fun to write my little 3.25% snarky rant.

[Jackpine Radical]

155. Without getting into the merits orf the case,

your math is horseshit.

The devil's in the decimals.

[emilyg]

38. ABC had something similar tonight

[The River]

41. Is Larry Craig Providing You With

Bathroom traffic data?

[SayitAintSo]

49. ????????????

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[stillcool]

57. read much?

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=274863

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=2...
Friday, January 25, 2008
'Present' votes defended by Ill. lawmakers
By Daniel C. Vock, Stateline.org

In most legislatures, lawmakers vote either “yes” or “no” on bills, but in Illinois, senators and representatives can hit a third button for a “present” vote. Now that quirk — not unique to Illinois — has sparked heated exchanges among Democrats vying for president.

The two main rivals of Illinois’ U.S. Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination accused him during a debate Monday (Jan. 21) of ducking important votes by voting “present” about 130 times during his eight years in the Illinois Senate.

But Obama’s former colleagues who still serve in the Illinois Capitol say that the attacks are off-base and that either Obama’s opponents don’t understand how things work in Springfield or they are deliberately distorting his record.

“To insinuate the ‘present’ vote means you’re indecisive, that you don’t have the courage to hold public office, that’s a stretch. But, it’s good politics,” said state Rep. Bill Black (R), a 22-year veteran of the House and his party’s floor leader.

In fact, he said, Illinois legislators get attacked for their “present” votes nearly every campaign season. “It’s always been a campaign gimmick, really. If you vote ‘present’ once in 23 years, somebody will bring it up.”

The “present” vote in Illinois is sometimes cast by state lawmakers with a conflict of interest who would rather not weigh in on an issue. Other times, members use the option to object to certain parts of a bill, even though they may agree with its overall purpose.

“The ‘present’ vote is used, especially by more thoughtful legislators, not as a means of avoiding taking a position on an issue, but as a means of signaling concerns about an issue,” said state Rep. John Fritchey (D), an Obama supporter.

The Land of Lincoln isn’t the only state where lawmakers can register their displeasure without actually voting against a bill. Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, Missouri and Texas also allow “present” votes or similar options in at least one chamber, according to a recent review of chamber rules by the National Conference of State Legislatures.

In Illinois, the “present” vote works as a vote against a measure during final action.

State Sen. John Cullerton (D) calls the “present” vote “a no vote with an explanation.” Legally, there’s not much difference between the two votes, but practically, it can let the sponsors or other legislators know of problems with the bill that should be corrected.
Contact Daniel C. Vock at [e-mail] .

[CoffeeCat]

7. With thousands of votes cast, he voted present...

1 percent of the time.

Gee, how many votes did Clinton miss this year alone? 30 percent? That was worse
than "present." She didn't even show up.

On the other hand, I think this "present" issue has not been fully explained.
There was some talk about it before, when this issue came up--about how Illinois
State Senators use "present" as a bargaining chip. They vote "present" to let
people know that they would vote "yes" if some things in the bill were changed,
deleted or added.

It's my understanding that "present" is a signal--come talk with me and negotiate
and I just might vote "yes" if we can compromise.

I need to do more research on this, but for right now--I don't think we know the
full story on "present."

Obama needs to fully explain and defend this, because you know Hillzilla will show
up, ranting about it. He needs to be prepared to answer this and put this issue
to bed.

Does anyone know...how is a "present" vote registered in the Illinois legislature?
It is counted as a "yes", "no" or is it not counted at all?

[juajen]

28. I've actually heard Glitterbama attempt an explanation of this,

I believe, it was in an early debate. It wasn't a satisfactory answer then and it isn't today. I would like to see every vote dissected, however. If it is proven that this was done to garner more discussion, I certainly would reassess my opinion. No glitter sprinkled over it would also be nice. He is very adept at this.

[cd3dem]

36. voting "present" does not show leadership! is this the best you can offer as a candidate?

[stillcool]

61. Have you seen this?

Friday, January 25, 2008
'Present' votes defended by Ill. lawmakers
By Daniel C. Vock, Stateline.org

In most legislatures, lawmakers vote either “yes” or “no” on bills, but in Illinois, senators and representatives can hit a third button for a “present” vote. Now that quirk — not unique to Illinois — has sparked heated exchanges among Democrats vying for president.

The two main rivals of Illinois’ U.S. Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination accused him during a debate Monday (Jan. 21) of ducking important votes by voting “present” about 130 times during his eight years in the Illinois Senate.

But Obama’s former colleagues who still serve in the Illinois Capitol say that the attacks are off-base and that either Obama’s opponents don’t understand how things work in Springfield or they are deliberately distorting his record.

“To insinuate the ‘present’ vote means you’re indecisive, that you don’t have the courage to hold public office, that’s a stretch. But, it’s good politics,” said state Rep. Bill Black (R), a 22-year veteran of the House and his party’s floor leader.

In fact, he said, Illinois legislators get attacked for their “present” votes nearly every campaign season. “It’s always been a campaign gimmick, really. If you vote ‘present’ once in 23 years, somebody will bring it up.”

The “present” vote in Illinois is sometimes cast by state lawmakers with a conflict of interest who would rather not weigh in on an issue. Other times, members use the option to object to certain parts of a bill, even though they may agree with its overall purpose.

“The ‘present’ vote is used, especially by more thoughtful legislators, not as a means of avoiding taking a position on an issue, but as a means of signaling concerns about an issue,” said state Rep. John Fritchey (D), an Obama supporter.

The Land of Lincoln isn’t the only state where lawmakers can register their displeasure without actually voting against a bill. Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, Missouri and Texas also allow “present” votes or similar options in at least one chamber, according to a recent review of chamber rules by the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Please read more:
http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=274863

[HarveyBrooks]

111. Have you seen this?

We aren't talking about a "present" vote on whether to name a state office building after a deceased state official, but rather about votes that reflect an officeholder's core values.

For example, in 1997, Obama voted "present" on two bills (HB 382 and SB 230) that would have prohibited a procedure often referred to as partial birth abortion. He also voted "present" on SB 71, which lowered the first offense of carrying a concealed weapon from a felony to a misdemeanor and raised the penalty of subsequent offenses.

In 1999, Obama voted "present" on SB 759, a bill that required mandatory adult prosecution for firing a gun on or near school grounds. The bill passed the state Senate 52-1. Also in 1999, Obama voted "present" on HB 854 that protected the privacy of sex-abuse victims by allowing petitions to have the trial records sealed. He was the only member to not support the bill.

In 2001, Obama voted "present" on two parental notification abortion bills (HB 1900 and SB 562), and he voted "present" on a series of bills (SB 1093, 1094, 1095) that sought to protect a child if it survived a failed abortion. In his book, the Audacity of Hope, on page 132, Obama explained his problems with the "born alive" bills, specifically arguing that they would overturn Roe v. Wade. But he failed to mention that he only felt strongly enough to vote "present" on the bills instead of "no."

And finally in 2001, Obama voted "present" on SB 609, a bill prohibiting strip clubs and other adult establishments from being within 1,000 feet of schools, churches, and daycares.

If Obama had taken a position for or against these bills, he would have pleased some constituents and alienated others. Instead, the Illinois legislator-turned-U.S. senator and, now, Democratic presidential hopeful essentially took a pass.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/02/the_everpresent_obama.html

[stillcool]

128. should I give more weight...

to the interpretation of the present vote by writer Nathan Gonzales, or to the interpretation of the present vote by legislators in the Illinois State Senate that use it? :shrug:

[rpannier]

63. It counts as a no vote

[SayitAintSo]

10. The hottest places in hell are reserved...

for those who, in times of moral crisis maintain their neutrality
-- St. Thomas Aquinas

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

11. I heard he took a penny out of the "need a penny" cup...

and didn't put a replacement penny back the next time he was in the store!

[rpannier]

64. I heard it was four pennies

So it's 400x worse

[FogerRox]

17. What size quorum does the state require ? & is the present vote to determine if there is a quorum.

If this is true, inquiring minds might like to know.

[Pirate Smile]

19. Here is the answer to the Present issue: "Present’ Perfect "

"Present’ Perfect

By ABNER J. MIKVA
Published: February 16, 2008

SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON should probably be forgiven for not remembering the course on the state Constitution that she would have had to take as an eighth grader in Illinois. But had she remembered it, she would have known that Senator Barack Obama was not ducking his responsibility in the Illinois Senate when he voted “present” on many issues.

Unlike Congress and the legislatures of most other states, each chamber of the Illinois Legislature requires a “constitutional majority” to pass a bill. The state Senate has 59 members, so it takes 30 affirmative votes. This makes a “present” vote the same as a no. If a bill receives 29 votes, but the rest of the senators vote “present,” it fails.

In Congress, in contrast, a bill can pass in either the House or the Senate as long as more people vote for it than against it. If 10 people vote in favor and nine against, and the rest either vote “present” or don’t vote at all, the bill passes. It can actually pass with just one vote, as long as no one votes no.

In the Illinois Senate, there can be strategic reasons for voting “present” rather than simply no. A member might approve the intent of legislation, but not its scope or the way it has been drafted. A “present” vote can send a signal to a bill’s sponsors that the legislator might support an amended version. Voting “present” can also be a way to exercise fiscal restraint, without opposing the subject of the bill.

I recall voting “present” on many bills when I was in the Illinois Legislature. In the 1960s, for instance, I voted “present” on the annual highway appropriations bill. Like many of my fellow senators, I thought some of the money being allocated should have gone to public transportation. Still, I didn’t want to vote no, because I did not want to stand against the basic principle of maintaining our public roads. So I voted “present.”

It never occurred to me or to any of my critics that I was ducking responsibility for a making a decision. Mr. Obama was an outspoken member of the Illinois Senate, and not someone known for dodging questions, whether they were on ethics, police responsibility, women’s choice or any other hot-button issue.

Even if Senator Clinton does not remember the constitutional majority requirement in Illinois, one of her advisers might have explained it to her. When I was White House counsel, President Clinton frequently reminded me that he had taught constitutional law before he ran for public office. I would hope that he would assume that another constitutional scholar — Barack Obama — would be aware of his voting responsibilities as a state legislator.

Abner J. Mikva has been an Illinois state legislator, a United States congressman, a federal judge and, from 1994 to 1995, White House counsel. He now directs the Mandel Legal Aid Clinic at the University of Chicago Law School. Mr. Mikva serves as an informal adviser to Barack Obama's presidential campaign.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/opinion/16mikva.html

[Seabiscuit]

75. A "present" vote in Congress is a vote that doesn't support a bill. It counts just as much

as a vote against a bill (a no vote) as a "present" vote would in Illinois.

But the reality is that a "present" vote is equivalent to not voting at all in either Illinois or Congress. You're not supporting the bill. Period.

In either Illinois or Congress such a vote is a copout. A refusal to vote for or against a bill with a yea or nay, because all you're worried about is your own future, and not wanting to hear some opponent in a future race blast you for voting for or against any particular bill. As I see it, that's the game Obama was playing, because in retrospect, he certainly had some grandiose ambitions for his future back then. In other words, he was more concerned about politics back then than the issues raised in those 100+ bills he voted "present" on.

The problem Obama has, as Edwards pointed out in one of his last debates (if not the last one) is that Obama still refuses to give any reason for his "present" votes in Illinois when asked why. As a result, he comes across as someone lacking leadership skills because either he voted "present" all those times because he can't make a decision, or he has voted that way out of a refusal to be held accountable for any position he might take on any particular bill.

[CreekDog]

29. So the reason Hillary is not as the OP says is because of Obama's present votes?

help me out, I'm a little slow and am not understanding how you dispute one argument about Clinton with an unrelated argument about Obama.

[akbacchus_BC]

107. Voting present is better than abstaining. Have no idea why Obama would

vote present but I do know that I respect him for voting against the invasion of Iraq. If none of you know what it is to kill a country, he did, and he voted against it. 1 million people died, country in shambles since Clinton sporadically bombed her. It takes a brave heart to even support your government!

[polmaven]

121. Excuse me,

He voted against the invasion of Iraq where? And when?

You do realize he was not a member of the US Senate at the time the vote on the IWR was taken, right?

You do also realize that, since his election to the Senate, his votes regarding Iraq have been exactly the same as Senator Clinton's votes, right?

[stillcool]

42. is this another recycling job?

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=274863
Friday, January 25, 2008
'Present' votes defended by Ill. lawmakers
By Daniel C. Vock, Stateline.org

In most legislatures, lawmakers vote either “yes” or “no” on bills, but in Illinois, senators and representatives can hit a third button for a “present” vote. Now that quirk — not unique to Illinois — has sparked heated exchanges among Democrats vying for president.

The two main rivals of Illinois’ U.S. Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination accused him during a debate Monday (Jan. 21) of ducking important votes by voting “present” about 130 times during his eight years in the Illinois Senate.

But Obama’s former colleagues who still serve in the Illinois Capitol say that the attacks are off-base and that either Obama’s opponents don’t understand how things work in Springfield or they are deliberately distorting his record.

“To insinuate the ‘present’ vote means you’re indecisive, that you don’t have the courage to hold public office, that’s a stretch. But, it’s good politics,” said state Rep. Bill Black (R), a 22-year veteran of the House and his party’s floor leader.

In fact, he said, Illinois legislators get attacked for their “present” votes nearly every campaign season. “It’s always been a campaign gimmick, really. If you vote ‘present’ once in 23 years, somebody will bring it up.”

The “present” vote in Illinois is sometimes cast by state lawmakers with a conflict of interest who would rather not weigh in on an issue. Other times, members use the option to object to certain parts of a bill, even though they may agree with its overall purpose.

“The ‘present’ vote is used, especially by more thoughtful legislators, not as a means of avoiding taking a position on an issue, but as a means of signaling concerns about an issue,” said state Rep. John Fritchey (D), an Obama supporter.

The Land of Lincoln isn’t the only state where lawmakers can register their displeasure without actually voting against a bill. Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, Missouri and Texas also allow “present” votes or similar options in at least one chamber, according to a recent review of chamber rules by the National Conference of State Legislatures.

In Illinois, the “present” vote works as a vote against a measure during final action.

State Sen. John Cullerton (D) calls the “present” vote “a no vote with an explanation.” Legally, there’s not much difference between the two votes, but practically, it can let the sponsors or other legislators know of problems with the bill that should be corrected.
Contact Daniel C. Vock at [e-mail].

[karynnj]

59. There has been plenty written that the Illinois legislature has

that vote to mean specific things - and it is a reasonable and useful vote.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

70. If

you are still using the "present" argument against Obama, you havent been paying attention.

[bjobotts]

83. That's 'cause he was too busy running for congress.

[sendero]

114. Rather than vote like HRC..

... with the Bushes on everything that matters, I'd prefer that HRC vote "present".

[humbled_opinion]

135. Have you even been to Barrack Obama's website?

http://www.barackobama.com/index.php

Look at the issues find out where he stands.

I cannot find a single fault and if he can do what he wants to do for US and if We are behind him then it will mean real change for American and it is the right answer for US.

Isn't it about time, really.

[Hieronymus]

154. Who has to worry about swiftboating from the GOP, when there's plenty ....

of that coming from the Democrats?

[Window]

8. I feel your pain.

Peace:thumbsup:

[K Gardner]

9. Excellent. K&R. Exactly what I would have said, had I the time and the words :-)

[OzarkDem]

12. More hysteria from the Obama camp

anything to divert attention from the Farrakhan endorsement.

[Botany]

16. It is illegal to own a hedgehog

[leftstreet]

62. .

Vets 'pop' hedgehog to save its life after it balloons to size of football

Last updated at 08:42am on 5th June 2007

Vets had to save a hedgehog by popping it after it ballooned to the size of a football.

A woman found the hugely inflated hog, nicknamed Michelin, curled up on her driveway and became worried because it was unable to move.

She managed to pick up the prickly creature and took him to a nearby animal rescue centre where experts deflated him.

The unusual condition which caused Michelin to swell with air is called "ballooning".

It is caused by air escaping from the hedgehog's lungs and being trapped underneath its skin.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=459840&in_page_id=1770

[no name no slogan]

21. It's a free county. Farrakhan can endorse whoever he wants

Whether or not Obama ACCEPTS the endorsement is what matters.

[juajen]

31. How did I miss this? When did he endorse?

NT

[Politicalboi]

76. Well who is worse

Farrakhan or Ann Coulter? My vote is with Ann

[cui bono]

96. More hysteria about Farrakhan

anything to divert attention from Hillary cracking up and acting like a lunatic.

[RunningFromCongress]

141. Hysteria? Isn't that sexist?

[closeupready]

13. Amen. When she is up for re-election here in NY State (a big if), I will not want her as the Dem

candidate.

[11 Bravo]

15. Maybe Rick Lazio will run again. Then you can proudly cast your vote for ...

ANYONE BUT HILLARY! Genius.

[Oleladylib]

25. Gosh..Rick..fogot about 'im..he'll have 100 votes yet.

[billyoc]

23. Don't worry, she's history. nt

[bjobotts]

85. That was the goal of the GOP, the press and O-eliminate Hillary.

The GOP has been plotting this for years and they depend on the viciousness of Obama supporters and the press to help them complete their long time goal. Both candidates would make good presidents but some think they have to put one down to get the other elected. It's like saying you have a screwed up relationship with your mother filled with guilt and remorse which of course you will deny and making it fit with your voting preferences. You don't stand for O as much as you stand against your mother...er I mean Hillary. O by any other name would still be against Hillary and that's what counts or else you would be telling us how great O is instead of how bad Hillary is.

The 'last straw' means you must be carrying around an awful burden of straws and they cannot all be coming from Hillary...see a therapist

[cui bono]

97. I'll take the rapist for $1000 Alex.

And the answer is...

psychobabble.

[billyoc]

110. No reason she can't run for the Senate in your state,

I hear she doesn't mind relocating. :eyes:

[BzaDem]

18. There are always two sides

Frankly, most of what you say could be (and often is) applied to many candidates. Most candidates have unpopular votes. Most campaigns are negative (much more so than this campaign), and most campaigns involve language that the opposing side declares smears, lies, and attacks.

As far as race-baiting goes, both the Obama and Clinton camps are guilty. Hillary simply said that both MLK and Lyndon Johnson were instrumental in turning MLK's vision into law. That is not race baiting in any sense of the word. Obama's camp was the one that took that remark and put out a 4 page memo to the press, saying that Hillary was trying to diminish MLK's accomplishments. Then the fued started. We know that Bill may have said some things that were inappropriate (such as the Jesse Jackson comments), but please don't make it sound like Hillary was the only one using race in politics.

The caucus system should be bashed. It is completely undemocratic. Even its backers don't claim it's democratic. People say it is a good system because it represents the views of those who pay attention to the issues. But frankly, many people who struggle to provide for their families don't have time to pay attention to the issues. Many people who struggle to provide for their families don't have time to go out and caucus from 6-8 on a given night. That's the whole reason why in democracies, voting is supposed to be easy and quick for everyone.

As far as dismissing red-state democrats, I agree that pretending their voices don't count is not appropriate. But many were saying that the fact that Obama won those red states means he might somehow have a better shot at winning those states in the GE. That is blatently false. The idea that a 20,000 person caucus of active democratic party members AT ALL represents a GE electorate of several million is ludicrous. I think that was in part what she was responding to (though I agree she should have clarified).

The whole point of superdelegates was to involve elected officials in the process, in case a completely unelectable candidate wins all the primaries. I don't think Obama is completely unelectable, and I definately favor voters having their say. But for Obama supporters to bash superdelegates (established for that very reason in the rules for decades) and then call for Florida not counting is breathtaking hypocricy. I guarantee you that if it were the other way around, Obama supporters would be defending superdelegates and the rights of Floridians. That's what really bothers me; I thought the right to vote was supposed to be a solid Democratic principle, that Republicans do everything they can to thwart. But after this election, I know that it is similarly ignored by those who think it is convenient to their particular end.

And finally, the negative campaigning going on in this election is NOTHING compared to negative campaigning that goes on in most elections.

I certainly agree that some things Hillary has done should not be done in American politics (which is why I didn't address everything you mentioned). But much of it is not out of the ordinary, and some of it Obama himself has done. If you don't like it, you should be attacking the broken system, not the candidate who simply at this moment happens to be campaigning in this broken system.

[ArfDogMNO]

35. What does 'may have said' mean when it is on film?

"We know that Bill may have said some things that were inappropriate (such as the Jesse Jackson comments)"

May have said or absolutely DID say?

[BzaDem]

56. What I meant was may have been inappropriate.

Some of the things Bill said (like the Jesse Jackson comments) were indeed inappropriate. Other things he said (such as bringing up how Obama took down his Iraq war speech from his website in 2003, said he wasn't sure how he would have voted in 2004 to protect Kerry, and continued to vote to fund the war) were definately not inappropriate. That's what the fairy tale comment was about, and it was completely reasonable. You can disagree with the content, but the idea that calling ONE of his stances a fairy tale is racist is rediculous.

[ArfDogMNO]

74. fair enough, thanks for replying

the jesse jackson comment was incredibly stupid, and did real harm to HRC's campaign imho. Even worse was that jackson didn't win primaries, but caucuses.

[polmaven]

122. I am not at all sure the Jesse Jackson

comment was as inappropriate as it has been made ou to be.

He did not just pull the name of Jesse Jackson out of thin air because he is an African Amaerican. At the forum he was leaving as the press began their questions, the topic had been....Jesse Jackson! I think he more than likely was under the impression that the press knew, as they likely did/do, that. It was not an off the wall comment. It is a much jucier story to make Bill and Hillary Clinton racists, however, thatn to put that statement in context.

[Skittles]

87. you speak logically

that will not be welcome with the infested folk here

[Freida5]

26. What a stupid post. Grow up

[Hutzpa]

27. Well, he has spoken - The One

With so eloquently put what else can a man say but kudos....Cheif

What can one say to such ingratitude....what a sad day.

Thanks for posting!

:thumbsup:

[ArfDogMNO]

30. does this mean people who have been saying for years she was

a 'win at any cost' power-hungry candidate are being vindicated?

I believe retrospective review of her career in this light should be illustrative.

[juajen]

32. How is she different from any male candidate over the past dozens of years?

I see you are trying to hold our first viable female candidate to a different level; and people wonder why we so often mention misogyny on these threads.

[ArfDogMNO]

33. Who said she was different?

I certainly never did. If a male husband of a female president used his wife's influence and grabbed an open safe senate seat in a state he had never lived in in order to have a political platform to run for president later, what would you say about them?

[cd3dem]

34. go away! this is how I feel about Obama! he is not even a democrat in my book!

[Medusa]

37. Then we're even.

Because if Hillary is willing to go to these limits to win, or to ensure, at the very least that Obama cannot win the GE, then I'm beginning to seriously question her dedication to the Democratic party. It's all about Hillary, and the rest of the country, the world, this party be damned.

[cd3dem]

40. Obama is not worth the paper ballot that does not exist

[sendero]

115. Anyone who votes..

... for the IWR, Patriot and Kyl-Lieberman is no fucking Democrat that is for sure. You go away.

[emilyg]

39. My exact feelings about Obama.

[Stephanie]

43. I've been thinking about that. Who shd oppose her in the 2012 primary?

There has to be a decent and well-funded Democrat willing to step forward. Who should it be?

[knixphan]

44. the pendulum is always going to disappoint someone

...But let's start gearing up to fight the real enemy. I want to be part of the smackdown of McCain.

Let's get all our unregistered friends fired up and ready to go!

No Country For Old Men '08!

Si Se Puede.

[GarbagemanLB]

45. Prior to this election I was neutral towards her. I will now campaign and vote for whoever opposes

her if she decides to run again.

[mrbluto]

102. Really? You'd vote for McCain?

Really? You'd vote for McCain? Or a repupublican opposing her for her senate seat?

[bigtree]

46. bullshit. I find posts like this one 'vile' and divisive.

and, you don't have the last word on her future.

[dempartisan23]

47. great post

hillary clinton represents hate in my opinion. we must move past the politics of racial bigotry.

[From The Left]

48. Hill Is Going to Join Joementum

They're two sides of the same coin

[workinclasszero]

50. Hillary will be radioactive after her scorched earth campaign

***Hillary Clinton has done more than lose the Democratic nomination: she's destroyed her future in Democratic politics.***

For one shining moment, I thought Hillary would do the right thing. After the last debate, I thought she would bow out gracefully and get behind Obama for the good of the party.

Yeah thats right I was a sucker.

Then the filth started flowing from the Hillary campaign like sewage gushing from a broken toilet!

I should have known that a race-baiter would never do the right thing I suppose. She fooled me once, never again.

Obama needs to beat her ass all across this awesome country that is waking up to the damage that old pols like Hillary have done to us.

She and her kind (DLC) need to be utterly destroyed and driven from the dem party for good! Then we can easily face and defeat any thug party member as they will never reform.

I would be ashamed to have Hillary Clinton representing me. I hope she has serious progressive opposition the next time her Senate seat is up. That is an election I would love to give money to!

[WillyT]

51. Yep... K & R !!!

:evilfrown:

[eridani]

52. She'd be a perfectly good Senator for life from NY, IMO

Worked for Ted Kennedy, no?

[apocalypsehow]

53. Agreed. K & R.

:thumbsup:

[Muzza]

54. Hysteria. This is politics last time I checked!

[anonymous171]

55. Sexist. nt

[Muzza]

84. What? How is a male sexist towards another male? Explain:)

[yardwork]

65. What the fuck are you talking about?

Do you realize that you are raving?

[complain jane]

67. What?

WAAAA. Clinton did the same thing every friggen male politician has done! WAAAAA!

Give me a friggen break.

[BenDavid]

68. I say if obama cannot withstand this so called onslaught

by the clinton campaign and going to act like a little pisser, then McCain and the gop and the rnc and the swiftboaters will have him down for the count after the first right or left hook is thrown.

[CatnHat]

69. I wonder

if Obama or his supporters have a clue? Our country needs a tough leader, not someone who pisses in the corner; how will he stand up to tough foreign issues; if Obama and his cast of characters can't stand up in a primary. He's been avoiding (oops--I mean "distancing") himself alot from his old buddies? Come to think of it, isn't that nasty old Rezko trial coming up real soon? Stay tuned.

[dicknbush]

71. Well the republicans have slowly destroyed this woman for years but they left the really dirty work.

For the Democratic party to complete. Thank you all for your hatred that so mirrors the hatred from the right that has been leveld at this woman and her family for close to twenty years. You have learned your lessons well and now you are no different from the Rush limbaughs of the world and you like to think you are coming from a higher place . Your are not. You have villivfied this woamn with talking ponts straight out of the Republican talking points. You are a sick bunch really and shame on the Democratic party starting with that misogynist Ted Kennedy. He gets to rape another woman before he leaves the earth. ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTING!

[anonymous171]

77. lol wut?

I thought Hillary was vetted? I she can't take it from Democrats, how can she fight the GOP? Remember, the only time she went up against the "vast right-wing conspiracy" she lost.

[Beacool]

149. Couldn't have said it better!!!!!!!!!

Kennedy had the nerve to bash the Clintons during his endorsement of Obama. Neither Clinton has done ANYTHING to compare to a drunk Teddy leaving a girl to drown. Mary Jo survived for more than half an hour before she finally ran out of air. I know the Kennedys since their house in Palm Beach was not far from ours, from seeing their antics in Cape Cod and from traveling in similar circles. That family is quite corrupt. They may share our political views, but they are as dirty as they come (of course not all of them). I was in PB when Teddy's nephew raped that woman. We all knew that she was telling the truth, nonetheless, he got away with it.

So, for Teddy to act outraged about the Clintons' comments prior to the SC primary is frankly laughable!!! Hypocritical windbag!!! Why do you all think that Hillary won MA by 17%? As the Boston Globe called it: Kennedy backstabbed the Clintons and the people did not appreciate it.

[candymarl]

73. Give me a break

I've tried to be fair but c'mon! This one person is the most evil politician in the history of the Democratic party? At least, in my opinion, that's how she's being portrayed here.

She ain't perfect. Neither is Obama. Obama has taken his share of sleazy jabs at Clinton too. I've admired many Democratic politicians over the years. But I've never thought one was perfect.

BTW, her NY constituents really like her. She won by an even larger margin when she ran for re-election to the Senate. Where did her numbers increase the most? In the rural, conservative parts of NY state.

I still believe that Obama will win the nomination. I'll vote for him if he does. But anyone who thinks that Hillary's attacks are more vicious and more racist than what the Republicans will do is off the mark IMHO.

I don't buy the racism, or the sleaziness, or any of it. What is she supposed to do when her many of her statements are twisted? Obama taken his fair share of unkind and unpleasant jabs at Clinton too. But when Hillary does it she should be drummed out of the party forever?

Remember, in Connecticut, Hillary said she would support the democratic nominee. That was Ned Lamont. She did support him and gave money to his campaign. But Obama, who supported Lieberman, should stay?

The media has also jumped on the band wagon. The same media that lied about Gore and Kerry. The same media that spawned Judith Miller and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (ugh!). Now, the media is telling the truth when it goes on and on about Hillary's supposed faults and racism? What a difference one campaign makes!

[EFerrari]

90. Clinton also refused to debate her primary challenger.

How democratic.

And, did you know Barbara Boxer campaigned for Lieberman? That only means the Democrats were hedging their bets. It has nothing to do with Obama at all.

[Two Americas]

78. stranger and stranger

We have a post that I would characterize as "smears, lies, attacks, well beyond the simple facts of distasteful political compromise, vile behavior on a scale rarely seen, no tactic is too underhanded, no smear too vile, no action so disgusting that their conscience would prevent them from doing it" accusing a Democratic candidate of "smears, lies, attacks, well beyond the simple facts of distasteful political compromise, vile behavior on a scale rarely seen, no tactic is too underhanded, no smear too vile, no action so disgusting that their conscience would prevent them from doing it."

This is all getting so strange. I can't believe I am defending Senator Clinton. But these attacks on her (accusing her of doing what the attackers are in fact themselves doing) are very strange and disturbing.

It is a very interesting tactic - accuse another of what you are yourself doing.

What is happening? Is candidate loyalty out of hand and leading people to become irrational? There is some sort of odd projection going on, I think.

No doubt I will be attacked now. I must be one of "them!!!" I am probably preventing someone from having hope, or something.

[Muzza]

79. Oh, yet another anti-Hillary smear thread. BORING!

[Skittles]

86. they are very predictable now

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Politicalboi]

80. How come Hillary supporters

Don't realize that Hillary started this shit and she continues to do more harm to herself and the party everytime she opens her mouth. Hillary is taking out her anger at her campaign at Obama and it's all her fault. She counted her chickens too early. And what has she done lately for the disabled firemen and women of NY? So ready to protect us. What did she do on 9/11? Will she agree like Obama did to reverse the theft of our constituion? Is she going to hold Bush and Cheney responsible for any of the crimes they committed? I think there's more to Bill's hanging with Poppy than meets the eye.

[candymarl]

88. According to the rescue workers and fire fighters in NY

she is one of the few politicians that has fought for them to get the care and disability they deserve. BTW NY has two Senators. Where's Schumer on this?

She has fought to get veterans their benefits and care. She helped sponsor the SCHIP program for poor children and children whose parents medical insurance doesn't cover the bills.

As first lady she set up an office for women veterans. I'm one of those that office helped. I doubt I'm the only one. She was one of the driving forces behind the international conference held for women's rights.

Obama has created programs, as a State legislator for the poor. he served on a charitable board that gives money to disadvantaged children to help them go to college. He has worked, at the state level, on programs to help get out the vote in normally overlooked areas (poor and minority voters).

Why does one have to be Hillary supporter to point out an unfair or egregious attack on anyone?

As a result of my personal research I think Don Seigelman got the shaft. Does that make me a Hillary supporter?

I understand emotions can run high during political campaigns. But why not save the attacks for the real opposition?

Alienate a good percentage of the Democratic voting base what do you get? You get President McCain.

Should Bush be held accountable? Yes? Will either Hillary or Obama do it? I don't know. Will McCain do it? Definitely not.

Or do those statements make me a Hillary Supporter too?

And if I am a Hillary supporter what's wrong with that? Should I be sent to Gitmo or renditioned? Or should I just shut up and do as I'm told? My bad, I thought I was a member of the Democratic Party where all political points of view (with obvious exceptions) are welcomed.

[akbacchus_BC]

89. Very pathetic

And if I am a Hillary supporter what's wrong with that? Should I be sent to Gitmo or renditioned? Or should I just shut up and do as I'm told? My bad, I thought I was a member of the Democratic Party where all political points of view (with obvious exceptions) are welcomed.

Who is going to send you to gitmo? Gosh you wailers are unbelievable! Aha, you must be from the Middle East! What a crock

[candymarl]

91. You do understand a rhetorical questions

when you see them, don't you? It's also known as using hyperbole to make a point. Those types of arguments have been in use for centuries.

I'm not from the middle east. But if I were, would that make a difference? I would hope not.

[Beacool]

151. Very well said!!!!

For the ignorant ones who have the unmitigated gall to question what has Hillary done for the first responders, I have only this to say, when the NY firefighters endorsed Hillary they concluded their endorsement by stating:

"She's our hero"..............

Well she's my hero and the hero of plenty of other people, and she will continue be so no matter what public position she may hold in the future.

[bjobotts]

82. Bullshit. for u it was final straw from beginning, Just trying to find another way to smear

[jlake]

92. Get Real.

[AtomicKitten]

93. Amen.

[Splinter Cell]

94. No better....

She's no better then all the scumbags the right has unleashed over the years. She will stop at nothing, and all the things the Clintons were supposed to have stood for was bullshit. They stand for themselves, and are no better then the Bush machine.

This country needs a democratic president. That would exclude Hillary Clinton.

[McCamy Taylor]

95. Anyone who thinks that Hillary invented "Dirty tricks" have I got a thread for you

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4771862

If you are amazed (as I am) that there are back to back "I hate her" and "I hate him" thread here in the greatest (do they come in matching towels), you really need to check out this thread that I started.

If you are not amazed, and if you hate her or you hate him, you really, really need to check out this thread that I started

Let you in on a secret Karl Rove is a blood sucking vampire who feeds upon intra-party Democratic hate.

[FedUp_Queer]

98. The time has come...

to shut down DU and for everyone to take their ball and go home. This site has descended into nothing but silly name-calling worthy of a grade-school playground. I think everyone here really needs to ask themselves if they REALLY believe all the crap and innuendo each is saying about the other. I can NOT be the only who sees this. I do wonder if the people on this site have gotten so married to a candidate that they have lost site of what this is all about. Yeah, each candidate does and says things to malign and criticize the other candidate. Each puts out technically correct pieces of literature. The supporters of each have passion, etc., which is really great. But people...please...this notion that those who support "the other 'guy'" are delusional or despicable is just ridiculous. Do I like the down and dirty of politics? No. Do I wish that each candidate would take the high road (whatever that is)? Of course. But, remember that these people are humans. Their supporters are humans with all the frailties and notorious fallibility unique to human beings. And they do the wrong thing sometimes. So, please...PLEASE, let's tone down the rhetoric. I understand that one side wants to give it to the other side and call them liars, etc., but really...it's time the vitriol end.

My first choice was John Edwards, but I don't begrudge anyone's support for their candidate. I think all of the candidates are good and decent people who have this country's best interest at heart. Each of these people has been willing to put themselves on the line and risk failure, in public of all places with everyone to see. This has to be a most humbling thing for anyone. Finally, these candidate have done this knowing full well the almost insurmountable task of not only reversing course after 8 absolutely disastrous years, but beginning to reforge long, lost relationships internationally and restoring the social contract of Americans with their government. I understand passion, but please, folks, let's respect each other's views and candidates instead of imputing all kinds of insidious motives, etc. to the supporters of the candidates, and the candidates themselves.

[Apollo11]

103. How is Hillary "trying to use xenophobia and racism to secure victory"?

You mean the photo of Obama in Kenya?

You think Hillary personally instructed her campaign staff to circulate that to the media?

That photo was already published in the National Examiner a couple of weeks ago.

So the photo was already out in the public sphere before Feb 25th.

[panzerfaust]

108. well, yes

... and the reason that is RE-surfaced was?

I did not, do not, support either Obama or Hillary, as I think them both establishment tools, but whoever wins the nomination I will vote for in the election ... though if it is Hillary, it will take a strong act of will to do so: Her tactics are beneath contempt.

[polmaven]

127. And you believe it was her campaign

that put it out there because MATT DRUDGE told you so?????

[Ano Genitus]

161. And you believe it wasn't because HER CAMPAIGN told you so?

[polmaven]

169. I will believe her before MATT DRUDGE

ANY day!!!!!

[ClayZ]

106. K and R

[Perry Logan]

112. The Obama people must have a software application that writes these posts for them.

[Enthusiast]

113. I'll write one for you.

Hillary has zero chance in the general election. The reason is that she has alienated all the millions of enthusiastic Obama supporters. Do you believe Obama supporters will flock to the polls if Hillary would now somehow win the nomination? Obama brought enthusiasm. There is very little enthusiasm for Hillary. At one time I was prepared to vote for Hillary if she won the nomination. Her entire strategy now hinges on tearing down Obama. This is flawed.

[HamdenRice]

116. A question

You used to write that anyone who didn't "know" that Hillary was going to be the nominee was delusional. Will you have the decency to retract that assertion?

As for whose posts seem computer generated, Mr. Pot, I have the honor to introduce you to Mr. Kettle. Didn't you used to post up to 60 drive by nonsense one liners per day?

[rodeodance]

118. must be 2 -3 of demeaning rants every day. GROW up

[rodeodance]

119. 68 RECS for rant!

[ExPatLeftist]

120. Over the top

I see so many knee-jerk reactions here these days. This is a good example.

I understand that you are very frustrated with Clinton right now, as am I (FYI I voted for Obama), but some of your statements simply do not ring true or are quite exaggerated, IMO.

""Now, she's going to go down in history as having tried to destroy our future candidate for president with scorched earth politics.""
Only history will tell. Unless you are Nostradamus, you do not know. I would bet you nearly any amount that this is not truly how she will be remembered by history, though.

"It's the exact same thing that Bush and Karl Rove employed in 2000 against John McCain".
No, it's not. You may personally believe that it is similar, but that is definitely up for debate. IMO the personal attacks lowered against McCain are nothing like what Clinton has done. She has not gone into Obama's bedroom, she has not personally attacked - most of her attacks have been about issues or style. And yes, I think that she has gone too far with some of it (the mocking "Hope" speech was very childish and repulsive, IMO), but has not gotten nearly as personal as Rove tends to get. The Africa picture may be a bit Rovian, but it is tame by his standards and also we have yet to know whether Clinton herself even knew about that.

""This is vile behavior on a scale rarely seen even among Republicans,"".
Disagree totally. Not too get into the details, I am sure that most here could name Republican tricks well lower than what Clinton has pulled.

You have your opinion, I have mine - that this is a knee-jerk reaction that piles on the superlatives, but which does not, for the most part stand up to scrutiny.

A big concern of mine is that we Democrats will continue to get worked up and make huge comparisons that do not hold up, and therefore those points will be weakened when they are valid. The idiots here that started talking about "Hitler Youth" in reference to Obama supporters springs to mind. Now when people point out the similarities of the Bush admin to fascism, or other (arguably) valid comparisons, the answer will be, "Those lefties just compare everyone to Hitler." It doesn't help.



On an unrelated topic (based on comments in this and nearly every other thread on DU these days): People that actually choose which candidate to support based on the actions of the candidates' supporters are IDIOTS. Same to those that claim things like, "You are the reason people are not voting for candidate X!"... These people need a logic transplant. The candidates do not control the actions of those that claim to support them. Anyone with half a brain knows that.

[mcg]

129. So over the top it's in outer space, a poor OP, distorted, and

strategically idiotic. I would kind of like Clinton supporters to vote for Obama in the GE (assuming he gets the nomination which at this point is almost certain). I think that would help win the GE. Duh. Clinton is way better than republicans.

[Marrah_G]

124. THE SKY IS FALLING!!! THE END IS NEAR!!! OH THE HORROR !!!!

:eyes:

[Deep13]

125. Wa-a-a-a-ah! Hillary is trying to take Barack's toy away!

First, I have no idea what you are talking about except that it is something on the campaign. You understand that they are opponents, right? If you really think O is being damaged by HC's watered-down rhetoric, then you've picked the wrong guy.

[Sonnenschein]

126. Obama did the race baiting when he suggested that our first black president Clinton

is not a "bro" in the debate. This is so hypocritical

[kenfrequed]

130. Sheesh

Seriously, I really think you need to relax a bit. Even if Hillary fails in her presidential bid she gets to stay senatory of New York for as long as she wants.

I really don't care for the Clinton's free market ubber alles policies but lets not get absurd about all of this. The most she has lost is the support of liberals, which her side (the DLC) of the party never really listened to anyhow.

Not that Obama is much better really, most of the worthy candidates were already pushed out of the race.

[joeybee12]

131. The racism is all in your mind...and BO wants to keep it there...

...read into every little action and thought what you want to, without reason, without intelligence...as long as knee-jerk, ignorant comments and reactions like yours are around, a serious discussion of race will never take place in the political arena..and I'm sure that's what you and BO want.

[VoodooPharm]

132. HRC Online Tax Petition

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/hrctax/

Regardless of whom you support, truth and clarity should be the foundation of any presidential campaign. Let's get together, America, and see if we can level the playing field.

[susankh4]

133. Bwahahahaaaaa.....

Says who?

You?

[CaseyStorm]

134. Tell it like it is!!!

Amen!

[natrat]

136. she is sort of a duplicitous scum-avoiding the FISA vote

[Autumn]

137. I seriously doubt,

that she has destroyed her future in Democratic politics.it's a fucking primary,you are supposed to try to win. And I really like Obama,he wins, I got no problem with that. Do I agree with all of their votes? NO. I agree with a lot of them and that is all that matters to me.I am fucking proud to have either of them representing me. Scorched earth politics? They should both bring it on .I want proof that they can compete against the other side and kick ass.

[cseper]

138. All I want you Obama supporters to do ...

is tell us want Obama is going to change and how he is going to do it?
Oratory is just public speaking that is characterized by the use of stock phrases and that appeals chiefly to the emotions.

[WatchWhatISay]

139. At this point I'm getting embarrassed for her

She's a great Democrat, but if you ask me, she fails the critical test of letting the wrong guys control her campaign. I try to remember that she's gotta be stressed out so that her decision making is probably impaired, and not hold this against her permanently. I don't think its time for her to get out of the race until after she has a poor or only fair showing next Tuesday. But if trends continue in Texas and Ohio as they have been, she will have to swallow her pride and try to save her reputation for the future.

[cseper]

142. Wrath, you do not like Hillary Clinton, but....

What is Obama's position on the practice of signing statements ?

How about the Military Commissions Act
How about the Patriot Act
How about the Presidential Directive 51?
How about renditions?
How about the war(s) for empire and oil resource consolidation?
How about warrant less wiretapping and electronic surveillance?

Do you know? Has he said? Don't you want to know?

[SeaLyons]

144. This is too rediculous for words...

what the hell are you talking about??

[anamandujano]

145. You started this thread on 2/25. Now, how are you going to accuse her of

doing something worse today?

Be careful of these last straw pronouncements. It just cramps your style.

[asjr]

146. Well, so much for grownups!. This is one of

the most stupid threads I have ever seen.

[mckara]

147. I Could Not Agree More!

Apparently, the Clintons see themselves as more important than the party, and possibly the country. Perhaps they like Rovian slime tactics, but Democrats despise the use of lies and misrepresentions of facts for political game. We can do better as a party, and that is why Obama's appeal eclipses the popularity of the Clintons! :patriot:

[happygoluckytoyou]

148. MCCAIN IS STARTING A RUMOR THAT OBAMA HAS A BLACK BABY

[defendandprotect]

150. And when are we going to look at the future of the DLC in the Democratic Party --- ???

How to get rid of it, for one . . . ????

[WatchWhatISay]

153. Maybel they will all follow Joe Lieberman

out the door.

[SoxFan]

156. Purge the unbelievers, right?

Obama supporter:
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253636&kaid=104&subid=116

Obama supporter:
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254373&kaid=104&subid=116

Obama supporter:
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254413&kaid=104&subid=116

Obama supporter:
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254346&kaid=104&subid=116

Obama supporter:
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254244&kaid=104&subid=116

Obama supporter:
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254228&kaid=104&subid=116

[Indy Lurker]

152. Hillary will be great for Obama in the General Election

After Hillary's behavior, Republicans will look at Obama in the general election, and think to themselves, If Hillary hated him so much, he can't be that bad.

[ElboRuum]

157. I've seen one of these posts every day for the past couple of weeks...

Exactly which day is the "final straw"?

Not for nothin', but could the Anti-Hillary crowd please just decide on maybe a single day to declare V-HRC-day?

[pbca]

158. I know that I'll never

vote for anyone named Clinton ever again after this year, not any Clinton, for any office.

[leveymg]

160. CT and NY are contiguous states. She can head the Lieberman-Clinton Party. Go fight Joe for that.

And, I thought it was going to be a McCain-Lieberman third party. Little did I know that the DLC would serve up yet another candidate for Third Party status. :evilgrin:

[floridablue]

162. If the media bothered to report

Anything about Obama except the "Message of Great Hope", you would probably be just as upset. Do you know anything he really stands for? It appears to me that if anyone critices him they are going to get tagged as a racist, so they don't. Citizens like me who do not like him are not going to critize him and leave that door or criticism open much, but unlike 2004 and Kerry, this time I am damn well not going to vote for him.

[LiberalFighter]

165. The question is why did he vote present and not take a stand?

The reasons are not the same for each instance but they probably be grouped into different categories.

Whether constitutional.

Whether he had a problem with the bill.

Whether he didn't want to have his vote recorded either way.

Other categories....


But in the end a present vote is a no vote because it requires a yes vote to pass a bill. If the vote is close and is voted down then maybe it sends a signal to others that if adjustments to the bill are made it might pass.

Were there any statements made by Obama at the time he voted present as to why he did not vote yes or no?

[paulk]

168. you should get a job with the RNC

seriously.