Quantcast
 
 
 
Top Story
Sit Back, Relax, Get Ready to Rumble
My Journey to the Top
 
 
Latest News
Families will make case for vaccine link to autism
 
 
expand
CAMPAIGN 2008

Just Don’t Know What To Do With Myself

Bill Clinton has morphed from statesman into attack dog. Everyone's barking back—except, perhaps, the voters.

By Evan Thomas and Suzanne Smalley | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Updated: 10:16  p.m. ET Jan 26, 2008

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: mightymouse @ 03/21/2008 7:45:13 PM

    Comment: I am writing to Bill Gates and faxing him as well. I am sure heads will roll. What you did was the most injustice to the American people ever. You were the most bias media, you, msnbc and Nbc. Fox news was the only channel that gave us answers and showed us the truth about that racist man. There is 11 more primaries to go and for them to suggest that Hillary leave her campaign is bad. You all have been bias from the beginning and I will never forgive you. As long as i live I will make it a point to dicourage your paper, MSNBC and NBC NEWs. YOu just screwed us
    Lori McMaster

  • Posted By: jjanss @ 03/19/2008 4:30:30 PM

    Comment: In your March 24th issue you talk about lines from presidents, past and present. You attribute "nattering nabobs of negativism" to Richard Nixon but it was Spiro Agnew who said that in a speech in Des Moines, Iowa. JJanss from CA

  • Posted By: Nins @ 03/13/2008 10:47:26 PM

    Comment: Dear Illinois Voter, I'm sorry, but you have been mis-informed about the vote you are referring to. At issue was a bill to mandate care to pre-viable fetuses born alive." The first thing to note is "pre-viable." Fetuses below 26 weeks of age never survive, even with the best ICU care. Fetuses older than 26 weeks already have a law that mandates they be given medical care to save their lives. The bill you are referring to was promoted by the pro-Life camp and it was really quite clever. Had that bill passed it would have overturned Roe v. Wade, but only in the State of Illinois. It would have immediately been legally challenged by the pro-Choice groups and immediately struck down, since the Supreme Court has already ruled on that issue. Even though I am pro-Life, I could see how this bill was just a political ploy. It was designed to be used to smear the reputations of any politician who voted against it. It was not designed to protect the unborn, because the people who wrote it knew that the pre-viable fetuses in question would all die anyway. ??????This kind of thing is one of the reasons why Republicans like me are becoming disenfranchised from the GOP. Politics is not just some clever shell game that insiders play while we the taxpayers foot the bill for their power plays. We want our real issues heard and legislated for in effective ways.

    Believe it or not, as a pro-Choice Christian I think I have gotten better legislature out of Barack Obama than out of my own interest group. Obama has taken the time to listen to the religious voice and made some modest compromises with us, like voting against late term abortion and against partial birth abortion, even though he still has supported a woman's right to reproductive freedom by voting in favor of early abortions. To me, this is a good compromise. I know he's liberal at heart, but he listens to the other side, and that is important to me. It's a brave new world for conservative Republicans when we look to liberal Democrats to help us with our issues. But I'm a pragmatist. I go with what works.

  • Posted By: usvoter @ 03/09/2008 1:52:19 PM

    Comment: USVoter
    Obama will lose the electoral college if he is the nominee. He will either get the states John Kerry got or less states. In any case Obama is a certain loser. When Southern whites mark their ballots in Ak, La, Ms, Ky, Tn, Tx, Mo, Al, Va, W Va, Fl they the whites will vote against Obama because he is black, hundreds of thousands will actually go out and vote against Obama in these states because he is black. Racists will vote against Obama in Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico. Take a look at the states John Kerry won in 2004 and see how right I am. Many whites including Republicans and Independents will actually go out to vote against Obama to make sure a black person loses the presidential vote. The media ignores this because the media is politically correct. No president who ran as a Democrat has ever won without winning at least 3 southern states in the electoral college since Grover Cleveland in 1900, except Lyndon B Johnson in 1964. Obama has won primaries in states that are Republican states that always give their popular votes pluralities and electoral votes to Republican candidates for President. Mathematics decides the outcome. There is no way that Obama will get enough votes to win any pluralities or electoral college votes in states like Kansas and Wyoming. Obama is a throw away vote in the primary, certain to lose the general election. Let us hope that Obama loses the Democratic primary.

  • Posted By: emmarie @ 02/08/2008 4:38:40 AM

    Comment: I am totally disgusted with the media. We are in the mess we're in because the press did nothing to investigate or report on a current President who has done nothing but lie. If the Democrats were afraid of being called anti-American, traitors and anti troops for questioning this President and the Iraq War, then our journalists are reporting with a fear of being called The Liberal Press. Shame on YOU! DO. YOUR. JOB!!!!!!!

  • Posted By: myobndonttorture @ 02/05/2008 5:38:00 PM

    Comment: whoops - revised post:

    The title of this article, the slant, and the twist is simply disgusting. Almost nothing Bill Clinton has said has been factually incorrect. Almost every negative interpretation of what he has said has been horribly misconstrued and taken COMPLETELY out of context. Dan Abrams (msnbc) is the ONLY commentator I have seen in the whole damn country who has pointed this out, and drawn the only logical conclusion possible - that the media is badly biased against the Clintons.

    Well, ok; the other possibility is that Americans, and especially American "personalities", are simply too ignorant, lazy, and stupid to understand the English language - or to do anything but repackage some other writer's garbage and pass it off as a nation-wide opinion - as this writer has done.

    For every time that Bill has been factually off base, btw, Obama and his camp have one - or more - to match.

    I like Bill Clinton, Hillary, and Obama, and will vote for either candidate in the general. But I will remain disgusted with the American media for years to come. Yep, good luck and good night. It's dark as hell, with no sunlight in sight.

  • Posted By: myobndonttorture @ 02/05/2008 5:25:15 PM

    Comment: The title of this article, the slant, and the twist is simply disgusting. Almost nothing Bill Clinton has said has been factually incorrect. Almost every negative interpretation of what he has said has been horribly misconstrued and taken COMPLETELY out of context. Dan Abrams (msnbc) is the ONLY commentator I have seen in the whole damn country who has pointed this out, and drawn the only logical conclusion possible - that the media is badly biased against the Clintons.

    Well, ok; the other possibility is that Americans, and especially American "personalities", are simply too ignorant, lazy, and stupid to understand the English language - or to do anything but repackage some other writer's garbage and pass it off as a nation-wide opinion - as this writer has done.

    For every time that Bill has been factually off base, btw, Obama and his camp have one - or more - to match.

    I like Bill Clinton, Hillary, and Obama, and will vote for either candidate in the general. But I will remain disgusted with the American media for years to come. Yep, good luck and good night. It's dark as hell, with no sunlight in sight.

  • Posted By: myobndonttorture @ 02/05/2008 5:20:10 PM

    Comment: the title of this article, the slant, and the twist is simply disgusting. Almost nothing Bill Clinton has said has been factually incorrect. Almost every inegative interpretation of what he has said has been horribly misconstrued and taken COMPLETELY out of context. Dan Abrams (msnbc) is the ONLY commentator I have seen in the whole damn country who has pointed this out, and drawn the only logical conclusion possible - that the media is badly biased against the Clintons. The other possibility is that Americans, and especially American "personalities" are simply too ignorant, lazy, and stupid to unserstand the English language.

    For every time that Bill has been factually off base, btw, Obama and his camp have one - or more - to match.

    I like Clinton (both) and Obama, and will vote for either in the general. But I will remain disgusted with the American media morons and whores for years after this election.

  • Posted By: mentors2 @ 02/03/2008 9:17:08 AM

    Comment: This country is in a mess ----time for a change----- we do not need the same old bell RINGING THE SAME SOUND.

  • Posted By: neptune @ 02/01/2008 7:08:41 PM

    Comment: Billary is dishonest. Obama came up,, with no connections, against all odds.. Do u honestly think Obama supporters will vote for Hillary after Billary injected race and completely lied about Obama? If someone betrays their values to get ahead,,, how can u trust them with the presidency. Do the math.. Hillary, minus Obama supporters versus republican that hate the Clintons = another republican in Office. TRUE change.. Obama 08

  • Posted By: Oregonian2008 @ 01/31/2008 7:23:36 PM

    Comment: I watched online most of the items Newsweek included in its Clinton temper gallery. Given journalistic portrayals of these events???many stimulated by journalistic questioning???I was surprised at how ???un-angry??? Bill Clinton appeared to be in most of them. From watching those events, usually with more context than provided in the Newsweek Gallery, I would not classify the anger level of any of them as high as Newsweek did. I also have read comments from readers who attended the events journalists portrayed and, in the words of one reader, wondered after watching the videos ???what planet [the journalist] is on??? in portraying Clinton as angry or out of control.
    Among Washingtonians John McCain appears to be more famous than Bill Clinton for losing his temper. (See, for example, the list at http://wealthmotor.com/tifi/?p=2102. Evidently the Romney campaign also posted such a list.). Since quite a number of those events appear to have taken place when C-SPAN or other cameras were operating, will Newsweek soon run a gallery about John McCain???s anger.

  • Posted By: Oregonian2008 @ 01/31/2008 7:23:13 PM

    Comment: I watched online most of the items Newsweek included in its Clinton temper gallery. Given journalistic portrayals of these events???many stimulated by journalistic questioning???I was surprised at how ???un-angry??? Bill Clinton appeared to be in most of them. From watching those events, usually with more context than provided in the Newsweek Gallery, I would not classify the anger level of any of them as high as Newsweek did. I also have read comments from readers who attended the events journalists portrayed and, in the words of one reader, wondered after watching the videos ???what planet [the journalist] is on??? in portraying Clinton as angry or out of control.
    Among Washingtonians John McCain appears to be more famous than Bill Clinton for losing his temper. (See, for example, the list at http://wealthmotor.com/tifi/?p=2102. Evidently the Romney campaign also posted such a list.). Since quite a number of those events appear to have taken place when C-SPAN or other cameras were operating, will Newsweek soon run a gallery about John McCain???s anger.

  • Posted By: Oregonian2008 @ 01/31/2008 7:22:46 PM

    Comment: I watched online most of the items Newsweek included in its Clinton temper gallery. Given journalistic portrayals of these events???many stimulated by journalistic questioning???I was surprised at how ???un-angry??? Bill Clinton appeared to be in most of them. From watching those events, usually with more context than provided in the Newsweek Gallery, I would not classify the anger level of any of them as high as Newsweek did. I also have read comments from readers who attended the events journalists portrayed and, in the words of one reader, wondered after watching the videos ???what planet [the journalist] is on??? in portraying Clinton as angry or out of control.
    Among Washingtonians John McCain appears to be more famous than Bill Clinton for losing his temper. (See, for example, the list at http://wealthmotor.com/tifi/?p=2102. Evidently the Romney campaign also posted such a list.). Since quite a number of those events appear to have taken place when C-SPAN or other cameras were operating, will Newsweek soon run a gallery about John McCain???s anger.

  • Posted By: hillaryforpresident!!! @ 01/31/2008 1:30:03 PM

    Comment: eddiewhere: You just admitted to the Clinton's wonderful abilities to lead our Country, wouldn't you like to go back to that??? It is also so ironic to me that all of Obama's supporters are crying about Bill Clinton making "legitimate" complaints about his campaign yet Obama capitilizes on every opportunity to diss Hillary!!! He is the one who started the character attacks in fact at the first Democratic debate. Hillary never said a single bad thing about Obama and she is above that still. YOUR candidate is the mud-slinger so stop crying, suck it up, and actually come up with a legitimate idea to "change our country!"

    If people would stop letting media propaganda and scandel cloud their views, they would see that the obvious choice for a strong, smart, and determined leader that actually has a plan for her time in the White House, is Hillary Clinton!

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/31/2008 1:29:13 AM

    Comment: WE owe a lot to the CLINTON's for what they did in the ninety's. THOSE were the BEST OF TIMES for the majority, RICH, MIDDLE CLASS and the least fortunate. Unfortunately scandal and nine eleven have overshadowed the CLINTON successes. I am voting for OBAMA because we need to overcome divisivness. We need our children to learn that working together to overcome obstacles is "the way to go". Racism, destroying individual character and being less than honest is a bad example to sen our children. THIS is why McCain and OBAMA would be the best candidates to represent America to the world and to our children. IF we allow our youth to learn that winning at all costs works, then we cannot complain in the FUTURE.
    WE HAVE TO SEND A MESSAGE.

  • Posted By: Marcala3 @ 01/30/2008 6:49:12 PM

    Comment: I wonder...I wonder why most of the media loves to hate the Clintons and insist in blindsiding the public?
    Most of the media (sometimes even yourselves) kept mute with regard about the catastrophic blunders of the Bush administration; mute about the carnage he created in Iraq; mute about the bleeding of our tax / hard earned dollars in Iraq's war; mute about the concerns about millions of americans who lack health insurance; and I can go on and on.
    Hillary Clinton is addressing all those issues...she is more than qualified to be our president and we are blessed with a man of his stature as her husband, where I'm sure if she were to ask his advice, he is wise and experienced enough to render it.
    The media likes to sensationalize on trash...and wants the public to keep reading rubish which is so unbecoming of your publication...
    Please makes us read intelligent material and something that is worth reading.

  • Posted By: vclayson@msn.com @ 01/30/2008 4:06:41 PM

    Comment: Evan Thomas is another newsie in love with Bill Clinton, it's not romantic, it's more in the nature of the man love that men had for Elvis. The media wants Bill Clinton back, even in the secondary role of first spouse because they know he will be, for all practical purposes, be on his third and then fourth term a president and it would add the tittilation factor so craved by the public and needed by the media. With the two Clintons as an administration there would be no need for a VP as he would have no voice and would be fortunate to even be allowed in meetings at the WHite House. A Clinton administration would be a literal dictatorship.

  • Posted By: Jonster @ 01/30/2008 2:54:24 PM

    Comment: Even though Hillary Clinton stood by the old hound dogl, she still reminds most men of their first wife - the one with the kids, the house and the money.

  • Posted By: Jonster @ 01/30/2008 2:52:53 PM

    Comment: Hillary Clinton reminds men of their first wife . . . the one with the house, the kids, and the money.

  • Posted By: soisam @ 01/30/2008 2:51:28 AM

    Comment: The attacks by the media on the Clintons has been overwhelming in the past two weeks and they have been jubilantly supported by Obama supporters. The fact is that the media will just as mercilessly tear Obama down if he should win the nomination. Beyond that I think it is a strategy that may well backfire. As a supporter of Hillery Clinton I am feeling very, very hostile myself in response to attacks that I have found excessive and sometimes entirely unfounded. I am voting for Hillary Clinton not her husband, however Bill Clinton as it turned out agreed with ME on Obama's assessment of Reagan, and on his assessment of Obama's evolving position on Iraq and on the observation that-all other things being equal-- of course Blacks are going to turn out to vote for the Black candidate for President of the United States.. For goodness sakes, why wouldn't they? So when you call Bill Clinton a liar you are calling me a liar and when you accuse him of playing the race card, it seems to me that he is simply stating the obvious. One might say that it was peevish to note that of course Blacks turned out to vote for Obama, but racist? I hardly think so. It strikes me as ridiculous that even now we must not mention race. It is still the 500 pound elephant in the room.
    The idea of laying "race" to rest in America or at least redefining it was the most appealing aspect to me of Obama's campaign. Then there was the vision of the new face we could present to the world . But if we can't even have a rational discussion about the role of race in America within our own party instead of merely hurling charges of racism then the fairy tale is that we will be able to elect an African American President of United States in November. . Soisam

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/29/2008 8:35:16 PM

    Comment: OBAMA CAN WIN NATIONALLY HANDS DOWN. HILLARY CANNOT UNLESS SHE RUNS ON A VERY DIVISIVE AGENDA. OBAMA vs. McCAIN

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/29/2008 8:33:12 PM

    Comment: THE CLINTON"S ARE JUST TO polarizing. Too many scandals, to many investigations. I do not believe they are guilty in all those scandals I just believe AMERICA needs a change from the establishment. We do not need a years worth of divisive campaigning. IT would be amazing to see McCain vs OBAMA. A GOOD CLEAN HEAVY WEIGHT FIGHT. NO ONE GETS THEIR EAR BIT OFF. A ROMNEY CAMpaign would be just like BUSH'S very divisive and full of lies. IF AMERICA CHOOSES THESE TWO CANDIDATES to represent their respective parties then I think the AMERICAN political process can begin to heal and set an example to the rest of the world. WHAT KIND OF MESSAGE ARE WE SENDING IRAQIS and AFGHANS. IF we promote racial divide why shoud they give us the benefit of the doubt concerning ABU GRADE and BLACK WATER. ARE WE REALLY RACIST CAN IT BE THAT THE CLINTON"S ARE A REFLECTION OF OUR SOCIETY. DIVIDE people so we the CLINTON'S can attain the power we are entitled too and so rightfully deserve after my conduct in the OVAL OFFICE. No one else is capable of being president. I will become nasty and play the race card because the "MEDIA" is trying to take away the presidency from me and my wife.

    OBAMA HAS TO GAIN GROUND WITH THE LATINO VOTE. HE NEEDS TO BLITZ THE LATINO"S WITH COMMERCIALS OF ECONOMIC prosperity.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/29/2008 8:31:53 PM

    Comment: The coveted endorsement of TED KENNEDY " is a huge blow to New York Senator Hillary Clinton, who is both a senatorial colleague and a friend of the Kennedy family. In a campaign where Clinton has trumpeted her experience over Obama's call for hope and change, the endorsement by one of the most experienced and respected Democrats in the Senate is a particularly dramatic coup for Obama"Milligan 2008

    'Kennedy believes Obama can ``transcend race'' and bring unity to the country, a Kennedy associate told the Globe. Kennedy was also impressed by Obama's deep involvement last year in the bipartisan effort to craft legislation on immigration reform, a politically touchy subject the other presidential candidates avoided, the associate said".Milligan 2008

    OBAMA IS BOTH BLACK AND WHITE

  • Posted By: peace and love @ 01/29/2008 4:19:59 PM

    Comment:
    I am all about choice and I am thankful everyday to live in this country. Viva la choice in all areas of our lives.
    I am thankful that we have the forum and rights to participate in this manner. PS: I do not support Edwards not that it's anyone's business who I will vote for. The comment you quoted me about is my opinion about the masses - not for me personally. The Good Old Boys Club is alive and well in the USA.

  • Posted By: MissyE @ 01/29/2008 3:54:55 PM

    Comment: Be fair. I have a right to my opinion just as you had a right to your opinion when you said:

    peace and love @ 01/29/2008 6:26:34 AM
    Comment: Obama will not win The White House. The majority of Americans won't at this time vote for a black man for President. Most won't even vote for a woman. Our government has been run by white males for hundreds of years and the WASP/CHRISTIAN American male won't give that up. Poor us.

    According to you the only candidate is John Edwards. Well OK you said so but I don't agree. I am responding to the article, which is about Former President Bill Clinton and his involvement here. I feel your pain about the economy, the war, abortion, college repayment, taxes, autism research, right to life/abortion... I am here and aware so please don't admonish me.

  • Posted By: peace and love @ 01/29/2008 3:31:01 PM

    Comment: What I am saying is that pointing out what Mr. Clinton is doing isn't dealing with the actual candidates. We have been through the mud with the current administration and that's where the blame for our current situation should be. Slinging mud is nothing new in politics and if you think this is bad, why dont we all wait until there is one GOP and one Dem to see real mud flying. You are blaming Mr. Clinton for something that all of the candidates and their spokesmen are doing. You are just picking and choosing which ones to complain about.

  • Posted By: MissyE @ 01/29/2008 3:18:28 PM

    Comment: I am aware of the year. I am not frozen either. I have been serving my country for the last 10 years in the hottest places on the planet faithfully. I have been concentrating on the candidates, their experience, their tactics. Tell me, peace and love, where I should look next and what I should see because you obviously think my vision is blurred.

  • Posted By: peace and love @ 01/29/2008 2:56:39 PM

    Comment: Missy E get with the program - It's 2008! The country is upset because of the lying two faced leader/administration that we have had for the past 7 years and because of the war and the economy. Perhaps you are frozen in the 90's. Try concentrating on the actual candidates.

  • Posted By: MissyE @ 01/29/2008 2:33:31 PM

    Comment: I think all this unhelpful spewing is a true testament to how unhappy so many in our country are. There is no one candidate who we can chew out for being a slickster unless they were disbarred, impeached, caught lying redhanded and everything... oh...I guess I made my point.

  • Posted By: Maggie328 @ 01/29/2008 11:40:18 AM

    Comment: The former president was absolutely right when he answered that this is a "media-driven" story and the reporters' mean-spirited and whiny comment regarding his accurate answer in "Self-pity aside..." shows that they really don't take responsibility for it, but continue to slog in the mud.

  • Posted By: peace and love @ 01/29/2008 10:44:49 AM

    Comment: Mr. Clinton's lies did not cause thousands of our citizens to die and he was impeached for lying. Bush lied and thousands died and coninue to die. You can't make that any better. Mr. B needs to be in jail for war crimes. Clinton was impeached for lying. Why don't we do the same to Mr. B?

  • Posted By: Accessprez @ 01/29/2008 10:40:22 AM

    Comment: It would be best for the country if both Hilary and "Slick Willie" went home and dropped out of the race. I really do not care who becomes the next President of this country as long as it is not the Clintons.

    Note to "peace and love" Answer me this, did not president slick willie not tell us a whole bunch of lies for all the years he held the presidency. Like his most famous lie " I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN". Since when is oral sex not having sex with someone?

    • Posted By: Sass123 @ 01/30/2008 10:58:49

      Comment: Drudging up Bill's sex life is old news. Time to move on. I know you can't be naive enough to think that other Presidents (in recent years) haven't had laiisons with women in and out of the White House. And if you don't care who the next President is that is a sad commentary. You may have a choice between an empty suit with a "vision" and someone who wants us in Iraq for the next 100 years. With one, you will find that you can't eat a "vision" and with the other you may be kissing your rear end goodbye.

  • Posted By: peace and love @ 01/29/2008 10:05:41 AM

    Comment: Hoping that jack3213 isn't a GOP supporter because his man has been lying for ages but I have a feeling he is. I know a lie is a lie but the man in The White House has been lying to the American people for 7 years. That's enough reason to not allow a GOP into the ultimate power for a long time. The neo cons will find reasons galore to hit the Dems and try to divert attention from the same old GOP options they are offering.

  • Posted By: Jack3213 @ 01/29/2008 9:54:32 AM

    Comment: COURTING VOTERS in Iowa and New Hampshire, last August Sen. Hillary Clinton signed a pledge not to "campaign or participate" in the Michigan or Florida Democratic primaries. She participated in both primaries and is campaigning in Florida. Which proves, again, that Hillary Clinton is a liar.

    Clinton kept her name on the Michigan ballot when others removed theirs, she campaigned this past weekend in Florida, and she is pushing to seat Michigan and Florida delegates at the Democratic National Convention. The party stripped those states of delegates as punishment for moving up their primary dates.

    "I will try to persuade my delegates to seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida," Clinton said last week, after the New Hampshire primaries and Iowa caucuses were safely over.

    Clinton coldly and knowingly lied to New Hampshire and Iowa. Her promise was not a vague statement. It was a signed pledge with a clear and unequivocal meaning.

    She signed it thinking that keeping the other candidates out of Michigan and Florida was to her advantage, but knowing she would break it if that proved beneficial later on. It did, and she did.

    New Hampshire voters, you were played for suckers.

  • Posted By: dodgster @ 01/29/2008 9:46:29 AM

    Comment: The US media are clearly biased. As an international observer it makes for unpalletable viewing, and discredits the country.

  • Posted By: Karenn1 @ 01/29/2008 8:54:58 AM

    Comment:
    If americans let the latent reactionary in office. Than american is a gutton for punishment.

  • Posted By: peace and love @ 01/29/2008 8:43:42 AM

    Comment: Karenn1: I hope you are correct. However, for some reason, they voted Mr. B into office not once but twice. Based on the situation of the country, his second election should have never happened. He has continued to destroy our country. I don't pretend to understand the masses.

  • Posted By: Karenn1 @ 01/29/2008 8:36:30 AM

    Comment: No latent reactionary GOP OR Hillary

  • Posted By: Karenn1 @ 01/29/2008 8:06:43 AM

    Comment: Most american's won't vote for a Republican,to peace and love.

  • Posted By: Karenn1 @ 01/29/2008 7:59:54 AM

    Comment: Anybody but a GOP puppet.

  • Posted By: peace and love @ 01/29/2008 6:26:34 AM

    Comment: Obama will not win The White House. The majority of Americans won't at this time vote for a black man for President. Most won't even vote for a woman. Our government has been run by white males for hundreds of years and the WASP/CHRISTIAN American male won't give that up. Poor us.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/29/2008 2:18:04 AM

    Comment: THE CLINTON"S ARE JUST TO polarizing. Too many scandals, to many investigations. I do not believe they are guilty in all those scandals I just believe AMERICA needs a change from the establishment. We do not need a years worth of divisive campaigning. IT would be amazing to see McCain vs OBAMA. A GOOD CLEAN HEAVY WEIGHT FIGHT. NO ONE GETS THEIR EAR BIT OFF. A ROMNEY CAMpaign would be just like BUSH'S very divisive and full of lies. IF AMERICA CHOOSES THESE TWO CANDIDATES to represent their respective parties then I think the AMERICAN political process can begin to heal and set an example to the rest of the world. WHAT KIND OF MESSAGE ARE WE SENDING IRAQIS and AFGHANS. IF we promote racial divide why shoud they give us the benefit of the doubt concerning ABU GRADE and BLACK WATER. ARE WE REALLY RACIST CAN IT BE THAT THE CLINTON"S ARE A REFLECTION OF OUR SOCIETY. DIVIDE people so we the CLINTON'S can attain the power we are entitled too and so rightfully deserve after my conduct in the OVAL OFFICE. No one else is capable of being president. I will become nasty and play the race card because the "MEDIA" is trying to take away the presidency from me and my wife.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/29/2008 2:17:45 AM

    Comment: The coveted endorsement of TED KENNEDY " is a huge blow to New York Senator Hillary Clinton, who is both a senatorial colleague and a friend of the Kennedy family. In a campaign where Clinton has trumpeted her experience over Obama's call for hope and change, the endorsement by one of the most experienced and respected Democrats in the Senate is a particularly dramatic coup for Obama"Milligan 2008

    'Kennedy believes Obama can ``transcend race'' and bring unity to the country, a Kennedy associate told the Globe. Kennedy was also impressed by Obama's deep involvement last year in the bipartisan effort to craft legislation on immigration reform, a politically touchy subject the other presidential candidates avoided, the associate said".Milligan 2008

  • Posted By: Change is a verb not a platform @ 01/28/2008 11:26:06 PM

    Comment: TOP TEN LIST:
    What I learned when I turned off biased news networks like FOX/CNN/MSNBC.

    10. I actually like to watch movies on my big screen TV

    9. ???Change??? is what I find in pockets.

    8. I don???t have E.D.

    7. I don???t HAVE to argue about politics anymore.

    6. I realize I only have one vote, and it takes place in NOVEMBER.

    5. The ???noise??? left my head and peace filled the air.

    4. It is okay for someone I like to support someone I don???t like.

    3. Whoever wins the presidency is going to have a very difficult job, but they get a nice house.

    2. The loser will look younger then the winner in four years.

    1. When I turn off biased annoying arrogant newscasters, I hold the remote control and there is nothing they can say or sell to me, until I turn them back on.

  • Posted By: Aware! @ 01/28/2008 7:29:43 PM

    Comment: Why do Obama fans attack so viciously? Is this the politics of change? Or are you really Republicans in disguise? :(

    • Posted By: Change is a verb not a platform @ 01/29/2008 11:37:36

      Comment: One OBAMA person just told me...."git on the band wagon or shut up"

      Sounds like OBAMA is the Black Bush - disagree and off with your head, and you are racists if you question anything about OBAMA. Arrogance and ignorance.....

      • Posted By: MissyE @ 01/29/2008 14:38:32

        Comment: No you are incorrect. No one, including you, will feel better or gain a prize with this logic. It sounds like you are upset and that's human, but when if and when you lie to hurt someone else you are inhumane. Please don't join this bandwagon.

  • Posted By: ObamaMama @ 01/28/2008 7:17:24 PM

    Comment: The football player jailed for dogfighting.... Severe fines should be served to politicians who act like junkyard dogs, attacking character, misquoting, taking statements far from context, undermining. A disgraced ex-president continues to show his core, the one that humiliated this country before the world. I don't want slick willie or mrs. slick willie at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Their attack strategy reminds one of the raptors of Jurassic Park. The pair of them stand for what's broken in Washington.

  • Posted By: sjbrock80 @ 01/28/2008 7:00:49 PM

    Comment: You gotta be some kind of dog to marry that crazy Hillary.

  • Posted By: sjbrock80 @ 01/28/2008 6:58:19 PM

    Comment: Arf Arf, Billy Boy.

  • Posted By: Aware! @ 01/28/2008 6:54:31 PM

    Comment: Transformational change will only come with a change of heart, and that won't come while the male establishment reigns. The politics of division, race/gender baiting and saying anything to keep a woman from being elected have been used widely by the predominantly male media and other establishment males. This is why I find Big Ted's endorsement and the Obama run so troublesome.

    Misogyny is alive and well even if it is redirected through Bill Clinton and not by Bill Clinton.

    Jackie and Hillary did the hard work of Forgiveness and Reconciliation in their marriages. That interpersonal struggle and victory indicates the ability to bring about reconciliation on a larger scale.

    • Posted By: sbond @ 01/28/2008 19:08:42

      Comment: Truely stated.

      • Posted By: chirma @ 01/30/2008 04:25:56

        Comment: Hillary did not forgive or reconcile with Bill. She made the decision that she would stay with him out of sheer ambition. She enables his sexual dysfunction because it suits her purpose. She is neither a good role model for women, nor a good candidate for President. I personally would not have cared whether Bill cheated on her or not, except he did it in the OVAL OFFICE, with a girl entrusted to his care (being a Washington intern). How can anyone dismiss their behavior during and after that debacle. As for Jackie Kennedy, I think she did based on some stories but we'll never know for sure.

  • Posted By: Massiel08 @ 01/28/2008 6:39:51 PM

    Comment: I agreewith AWARE!, we all have our opinions that we are entitled to. As for me I understand how a democracy works and what is a president's role in our government. We need a president with sound judgement, to be an excellent listener, and someone who can makes responsible decisions. What is the point of having all this Washington experience if issues like healthcare, immigration, global warming, mid-east turmoil, our dependency on foreign oil etc have been around for decades. You can have the greatest ideas in the planet but you need to able to work well with others who disagree with you. I want progress, the Clintons don't represent that for me. Obama 08! Fired up and ready to go.

  • Posted By: Aware! @ 01/28/2008 6:36:32 PM

    Comment: The Republicans are coming!

  • Posted By: Hopeisalive08 @ 01/28/2008 6:27:10 PM

    Comment: Mr. Clinton's comments are unseemly for the party standard-bearer and have cost Mrs. Clinton support across the board. I think he has shown that it is actually Hillary's "fairy tale" that she is the one who would truly hold office if Americans fall for a third Clinton term. I am against a dynastic presidency, the politics of division, race baiting and saying anything to get elected. I am for the politics of hope, transformational change and a call to the better angels of our nature. That is why after 16 years of supporting and defending the Clintons, I now support the candidacy of Barack Obama.

  • Posted By: Aware! @ 01/28/2008 6:25:31 PM

    Comment: Hi Incredulous,

    I have a couple of excellent degrees, but it doesn't take a degree in Political Science to research, observe and reach a conclusion. In my opinion, Barack is not ready at this time. You are entitled to your opinion, and I hope you have done half of the research that I have.

  • Posted By: Incredulous in 08 @ 01/28/2008 5:57:11 PM

    Comment: Aware-- honestly, how could you possibly pretend to know whether someone is "ready" to be president? Where did you get your degree in Political Science? How much time have you spent with the Senator? Or for that matter, even reading what he has done during his time in public office?! He's not ready.... I'm so sick of people pretending they have any idea what that even means.

  • Posted By: Aware! @ 01/28/2008 5:53:11 PM

    Comment: You can stop pointing your finger at Bill Clinton and focus on Big Ted now. Obama is his protege, and it was Ted that encouraged his premature run. So, Ted is responsible for killing the Democrats. New/Old cronies!

    Hillary and Jackie both stayed with their men in spite of their sexual indiscretions while in office. They both demonstrated the core of the Christian Faith - Forgiveness and Reconciliation.

    What happened to Big Ted's marriage...?

    Reich is still angry because President Clinton didn't do things his way. Reich is doing exactly what he is falsely accusing the Clinton's of.

    Obama is a politician and is no different than any other in this regard. Leading the country as President is a different matter. He is just not ready!

  • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 01/28/2008 5:40:06 PM

    Comment: DON'T EVEN ATTACK DOGS HUMP WOMENS LEGS? WELL IT'S A JOB HU BILL! IF YOU DO NOT LIKE THE DEMS CHOICE ! JUST DON'T VOTE! FOR MORE DEAD KIDS, OR IS AN UNSTABLE, NUCLEAR, PAKISTAN, A VALID REASON TO INVADE IRAN TO? WAS IT NOT THE KENNEDYS WHO ALSO STOOD BEHIND JFK? HAD IT BEEN BUSH IN OFFICE, INSTEAD OF A KENNEDY. WE WOULD NOT BE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION!! AS GORE WOULD HAVE WON, HANDS DOWN, CAUSE FLA WOULD NOT BE THERE!

  • Posted By: Aware! @ 01/28/2008 5:20:24 PM

    Comment: You can stop pointing your finger at Bill Clinton and focus on Big Ted now. Obama is his prot??g??, and it was Ted that encouraged his premature run. So, Ted is responsible for killing the Democrats.

    Hillary and Jackie both stayed with their men in spite of their sexual indiscretions while in office. They both demonstrated the core of the Christian Faith - Forgiveness and Reconciliation.

    What happened to Big Ted's marriage...?

    Reich is still angry because President Clinton didn't do things his way. Reich is doing exactly what he is falsely accusing the Clinton's of.

    Obama is a politician and is no different than any other in this regard. Leading the country as President is a different matter. He is just not ready!

    • Posted By: MissyE @ 01/29/2008 14:45:57

      Comment: Excuse me ma'am. Hilary did not stand by her man and she did not forgive him. She indebted his manhood for life and is determined to stand in his shoes to belittle him. He asked for forgiveness and this is what he received and he will scream until he's red in the face for her to become President because he thinks it will soften her heart. Hillary is still hurting. She has not demonstrated forgiveness or reconciliation at all. She told us all in Iowa "I am so ready to lead." Tell me what flawed Christian woman does this remind you of before she was cursed in the garden of Eden?

  • Posted By: peace and love @ 01/28/2008 3:26:25 PM

    Comment: If Bill Clintons' affairs after he's been president destroys the Democrat party, it's probably just a bit too fragile. That of course, leaves the GOP. Those of you running away from Hillary should she win the nomination - do you plan to vote for the GOP? I think it's ridiculous to worry about a man/woman's personal life. I do not consider myself the moral police. The ones who would judge everyone else's lives will gladly judge and try to decide for us all on all issues. Whoever wins the Democrat nomination needs our support so we can fix our country.

  • Posted By: gigorgei @ 01/28/2008 3:10:14 PM

    Comment: peace and love said: It's important to concentrate on what's important in a president and it isn't whether or not he/she has had affairs.

    I agree with you that its not important in doing the job, but I would bet that it matters to the voter, and to top that, it goes into that categorical reality politicians fear the most; integrity. We also have to keep in mind that Hillary "might" receive a little pity for some voters for being on the other end. Yet, paradoxicly she loses probably more for the same reason. People usually do not gauge victims of adultry as a strength when they stay with their partner. And, if it is true about that book in August concerning more infidelities on behalf of President Clinton, it would destroy the party, not to mention the legacy.

  • Posted By: peace and love @ 01/28/2008 2:54:42 PM

    Comment: Just a note to mention that the illustrious man in The White House at this time didn't have affairs or at least that's the word on the street. What exactly does that mean? He has done more harm to this country than any other president in decades. It's important to concentrate on what's important in a president and it isn't whether or not he/she has had affairs.

    • Posted By: pinkpanther87413 @ 01/28/2008 17:47:41

      Comment: I THINK IT MEANS, He is like McCain, to old to get it up! Unless they get viagra on-line under a false name, and have it delivered to Libby or Rove! The traders both guilty of treason, buy not dead? They still get paid, and the best healthcare [OUR] money can buy, for treason?!

  • Posted By: gigorgei @ 01/28/2008 2:48:49 PM

    Comment: TomDavie said"Did he have affairs? Sure he did. Yes , that made him a jerk. But lets face it. It was 10 years ago now. The guy loves his wife and is just trying to help her. "

    Just to add, I was watching Bill Maher the other night and it was said that the owner of FOX news is going to release a book in August about all the women has been with....since leaving the White House. I don't know if it is true or not, but Dems would lose Independent and liberal voters. Obama is ging to be the Democrat in November.

  • Posted By: SharedThought @ 01/28/2008 2:24:19 PM

    Comment: Sometimes, it feels as if ALL politicians are willing to go negative when other approaches don't seem to be working for them. I will be glad when this election year is behind us.

  • Posted By: Micky Marsh @ 01/28/2008 2:14:21 PM

    Comment: I DON'T THINK BILL CILNTON IS A BAD PERSON, BUT THE STRATEGIC MANNER IN WHICH HE BEHAVED HIMSELF IN THESE PASS FEW WEEKS OVERSHADOWS HIS REPITATION SOMEWHAT. I BELIEVE MR CLINTON WANTED TO PROVOKE SENATOR BARACK OBAMA; OPENING A DOOR FOR DIRTY POLITICS THAT WOULD PUT A DENT INTO SENATOR BARACK OBAMA'S IDEOLOGY ABOUT CHANGE; GOOD TRY BILL.

  • Posted By: tomdavie @ 01/28/2008 2:11:17 PM

    Comment: If you guys heard this guy speak, and all the crud he goes thru for hillary, you wouldnt be quick to suggest this is all about Bill. He has nothing to prove here. He would rather be at home or playing golf. He doesnt need to go do 3 engagements a day, sleep 4 hours and do it all over again. He loves his wife. Did he have affairs? Sure he did. Yes , that made him a jerk. But lets face it. It was 10 years ago now. The guy loves his wife and is just trying to help her.

  • Posted By: Lauren Day @ 01/28/2008 2:05:17 PM

    Comment: Bill Clinton is crazy like a fox. Why can't people see that he's doing everything he can to SABOTAGE Hillary's campaign? He knows damn well that he's not doing her any favors. His massive ego couldn't take it if she landed the same job he had. Whether you like Hillary or not, I don't see how anyone can argue that she's an agent of "change." Hell, she doesn't even have the smarts to change husbands!

  • Posted By: bethechange1 @ 01/28/2008 1:39:05 PM

    Comment: I was torn between Clinton and Obama until the last week - I am now supporting Obama for these reasons: (1) Clinton's "brand" positioning against Obama is that she is "more experienced." If McCain is the Republican nominee, that won't be an advantage and he may have an advantage with independents. Also, in a Clinton/McCain contest, the youth vote will likely stay home. Although McCain is socially very conservative, he doesn't scare democrats and independents in the same way the other yahoos do. Obama brings the prospect of a "new brand" of politics that may bring "new customers (voters)" into the election, thereby giving dems a chance of beating McCain. (2) I am losing respect for Bill Clinton and am reminded of his lack of discipline and temper, which were problematic during his years in the white house. (3) I am afraid a Clinton nomination will bring more contentious and negative campaigning on both sides and I am so sick of that tone - America needs a leader with a more civil and hopeful tone, in my opinion. If Obama can surround himself with people that have any experience he lacks and use their advice, he can be "ready" on day one.

  • Posted By: peace and love @ 01/28/2008 1:03:45 PM

    Comment: After the filth and lies strewn against opponents during the past 8 years, this is rather tame. I also wonder if Obama, etc. think this is tough, how loud will they be crying when they are actually running (IF they are running) against the GOP? They havn't seen anything yet.

  • Posted By: eclecticbf @ 01/28/2008 12:40:30 PM

    Comment: Well, I see that the Clintons targeted demographic ??? uneducated and undereducated whites are on the job spewing their ignorance and hate. The media is very much in the Hillary camp as you have not heard them discuss Clinton strength with the ???black??? voter in South Carolina prior to Bill and his big black supporters beginning to throw out the buzz words that signal stereotypical southern whites but ???words??? that are also understood by southern blacks. No one expected Sen. Obama???s margin of victory over Sen. Clinton. It was all about the word choice and slants that produced such a large black vote. But why does the media keep talking about a majority of blacks voting for Sen. Obama. They don???t make an issue when a majority of whites vote for a all white candidate.

  • Posted By: tnewsweek @ 01/28/2008 11:54:59 AM

    Comment: The article doesn't quite have it right when it says that the voters don't care - they do, as shown by many of the comments. Until recently I still liked Bill (except for his unforgivable Monica-thrills), and while I didn't want to vote for Hillary, I could live with her in the WH. Now, between Bill's actions and her own (like GWB, Hillary has shown narcissistic tendencies), I really don't want either of them anymore to lead the country

  • Posted By: scope213 @ 01/28/2008 11:42:26 AM

    Comment: Is this what we want? The same old dirty politics? The same ol' game? We need change plain and simple. Obama has kept it clean and he has my vote.

    L.A. Times front page mentioned how Obama having an up hill climb and his "charm" won't cut it. Charm?! Obama inspires us and gives us hope. We actually have a chance in getting a president with some natural leadership skills. Sigh, however, the pro-Clinton L.A. Times and NYT is out there slowly chipping away at Obama...oh and Univision and Telemundo is brainwashing all the Latinos in L.A. to vote for Hillary...."Vote for Patron Hillary", lol.

  • Posted By: mikesmithcomic @ 01/28/2008 11:20:41 AM

    Comment: I voted for Bill Clinton twice and think he was a far better president than either Bush. However, it casts doubts upon Hillary Clinton's judgment to have her husband campaigning and using the terms "us" and "we" when refering to her candidacy. Hillary was doing just fine until Bill Clinton made it very clear Americans are being asked to "re-vote" to "re-Clinton" the White House. That doesn't exactly sound like the change most Americans desire. Unfortunately, the damage to Hillary's campaign has been done. And the Swift Boat party will destroy Obama quickly.

  • Posted By: jfecme @ 01/28/2008 10:39:54 AM

    Comment: I voted for the man twice. I would have considered more seriously voting for Senator Clinton.

    One thing got in the way: Bill. He belittles himself and the Presidency with his immature political commentary. He should have kept to the issues and not attempted to be an analyst.

  • Posted By: katford80 @ 01/28/2008 10:32:02 AM

    Comment: I am wondering what Clinton is trying to accomplish with his actions. People might want to believe that he trying to help his wife's campaign but I wonder if there is a deeper underlying reason for what he is doing, like maybe resentment or jealousy that his wife is running for an office that he once held. It wouldn't be the first time that a husband worked to diminish a wife's accomplishments, despite what he once was....her being elected would definitely change the dynamics of that relationship.

  • Posted By: carnabylane @ 01/28/2008 10:30:32 AM

    Comment: Thank goodness the KENNEDYS have spoken out against the Clinton hypocracy. Too bad other democrats don't show the same horror at what these two are trying to do. They are both criminals who belong behind bars in cells next to Bush and Cheney not running our country. When will Americans start respecting themselves and start acknowledging that WE THE PEOPLE deserve better than this in our elected officials.

    • Posted By: lamm01 @ 01/28/2008 13:38:23

      Comment: Let' see. Obama's leading finance contributor is finally indicted and arrested. Same man who is involved in the purchase ($300K below market value) of Obama's home. Also some other shady real estate dealings going on as well. Whitewater ,anyone?????? Stop the Clinton bashing and actually start doing your job which is to fully investigate political candidates running for the highest office..... Isn't it about time this man starts answering some critical questions about his past including drugs, the Muslim religion and to quote his own words in his book "his hatred for his mother's people"? Why don't you do the job you were hired to do and stop being a hired gun for the Obama campaign. You're continual ranting against the Clintons and orgasmic adulation of Obama is starting to grate against everyone's nerves....

  • Posted By: G. Pike @ 01/28/2008 10:27:01 AM

    Comment: Why should candidates be polite to each other? They're seeking the highest office in the land but to get their they have to drag their tongue across the ground from one end of the country to the other and maybe, just maybe they'll be president. That's what Bill Clinton did in 92 and Gore did in 2000 and Bush did in 2004. Barrack Obama, who is enormously gifted but is a more visionary concept than politicican, has not been forced to do that. He has worn the mantle of hope and promise and whatever very lightly, effortlessly. He promises change and not much else and the press swoons. Hell, I swooned. The guy's definitely got something. But then Bill Clinton challenged him. Bill Clinton is the best politician in the last 60 years--at least. He and his hard-to-like wife have studied history and what ails this country far more closely than any other candidate in the field, including the clearly-green Obama. They believe that she in conjunction with he could do a better job running this country than Obama. If they were to simply roll over and die as the media and certain members of their often pussilanimous party are urging them to do, they would not be good politicians and they would not be the Clintons. This last two weeks has reminded how rivetting and tough the clintons are--tough in a way democrats seems pathologically unable to be. Obama is a better candidate for Bill's attacks. And Bill Clinton is still the best there is. If he not his wife were the candidate this wouldn't even be close. Let them fight and stop whining about who's being mean and dishonest. It's an election for christsakes. it's got nothing to do with anything other winning.

  • Posted By: katford80 @ 01/28/2008 10:26:33 AM

    Comment: I am wondering the motive behind former President Clinton's remarks about Senator Obama...supposedly to benefit his wife's campaign...could it be that there might be some sort of resentment about his wife's running for the highest office...a position that he filled for eight years...is he really trying to undermine her campaign? This would not be the first case a husband undermining a wife's efforts to accomplish something for herself.

  • Posted By: travelgallery @ 01/28/2008 10:15:08 AM

    Comment: I had hoped this year's campaign would not be a repeat of past rancor, pettiness and division. In the main, except for the Clinton canidacy, it hasn't been. Bill Clinton doesnt' get the fact that he has harmed his wife's campaign. I could never vote for her as I could see what would transpire. Yes, it's past time for a female President, but it takes one who made it on her own and not because she has "married well". There is no 35 years of experience.

    I'm with Caroline, Ted, Patrick Kennedy and and ever growing number of Democrats, Independents and even a lot of Republicans. Barack Obama not only inspires hope but has a track record of reaching across the aisle and getting things done both in Illinois and in Washington. This is just what we need and yes "I'm Fired Up and Ready to Go".

  • Posted By: C. MacLean @ 01/28/2008 9:39:33 AM

    Comment: Bill always has been his own worst enemy. Now he is Hilary's.

    The man is an untreated sex addict. The disease of addiction, whether the use is alcohol, drugs, sex, or gambling, is much more than just obsessive thoughts of using and compulsive use even in the face of negative consequences, The disease of addiction includes symptoms such as arrogance, distorted thinking, inability to learn from one's mistakes, and most importantly, denial that there is a problem.

    For an untreated addict, even if the actual use stops (and it never stops for long) the other symptoms are still in evidence, and perhaps even escalated, because the addict is unable to medicate his/her problems with their substance of choice.

    George Bush, an alcoholic and cocaine abuser, displays the same symptoms of arrogance, distorted thinking, inability to learn from his mistakes, and temper outbursts as Bill Clinton. Isn't 16 years of untreated addicts in the White House enough?

    And on the subject of Hilary, who is married to an untreated addict, has she received any treatment for her codependency? We have had two untreated codependents in the White House in recent memory, Ford and Carter. While both were men of integrity, ultimately neither could make the tough decisions when needed, and neither will HIlary. And she will be too distracted making excuses for her husband's poor behavior to do what is needed for the country.

    Both Clintons need treatment. The kindest thing we as voters can do for them is not allow them any more power. Not unlike an intervention, a defeat might force them to examine their choices and make changes in their lives.

    Bill Clinton is not a statesman or an attack dog. He is an untreated sex addict, and needs our compassion as well as our insistence that he not be allowed to influence the country's future in any way.

  • Posted By: benvictor @ 01/28/2008 9:32:12 AM

    Comment: We are choosing someone for the Presidency of the U.S. of America. Prince Charming has gotten and continues to get a free pass from the media/press. To fill this serious void, others have assumed the task of highlighting the weaknesses and lack of experience of Prince Charming. When the media/press step up to their duty and responsibility, others can then step back from this duty and responsiblity.

  • Posted By: owwmn @ 01/28/2008 9:23:42 AM

    Comment: I don't condone sleazy political tactics but they seem to have become the norm for the past 8 years. No matter how hard they try the Clintons will never be able to rise to the level of sleezyness as that achieved by George Bush, Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. Go Hillary!!!!

  • Posted By: raconteuse @ 01/28/2008 9:22:49 AM

    Comment: Nobody seems to think "basics". If this is the campaign, won't the White House be like this? Say what you will, it's shaping up to be a co-presidency if Hillary gets in. It's not fair, but sure looks like those fears are panning out. I won't vote for Hillary now. Bill's done it himself.

  • Posted By: Bob Rice @ 01/28/2008 9:20:23 AM

    Comment: As a life-long Democrat, I am sad to say that the recent bitter attacks and counter-attacks between the Clintons and Senator Obama have in fact had a profound impact upon my thinking. I will not vote for the Senator from New York if she is the party's nominee. I simply won't vote. I am old enough to have voted many times against the lesser of evils. I am tired of caving in that way to what seems to me ultimately a very cynical way of being, which we as a nation need to try to change. I realize such a decision may entail letting all the poisons in the mud to hatch out, so to speak. (Letting a Republican president appoint the next Supreme Court justices, for example.) Dostoevsky (I think it was) once remarked that every country has the politicians it deserves. Just so. We can change things, though, and that is by not caving in to the contact-sport, gradualist politics, devoid of vision, that the Clintons seem to be practicing.

    Bob Rice, Westford, VT

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/28/2008 2:56:45 AM

    Comment: The coveted endorsement of TED KENNEDY " is a huge blow to New York Senator Hillary Clinton, who is both a senatorial colleague and a friend of the Kennedy family. In a campaign where Clinton has trumpeted her experience over Obama's call for hope and change, the endorsement by one of the most experienced and respected Democrats in the Senate is a particularly dramatic coup for Obama"Milligan 2008

    'Kennedy believes Obama can ``transcend race'' and bring unity to the country, a Kennedy associate told the Globe. Kennedy was also impressed by Obama's deep involvement last year in the bipartisan effort to craft legislation on immigration reform, a politically touchy subject the other presidential candidates avoided, the associate said".Milligan 2008

    • Posted By: Dr. Richard Trickle @ 01/28/2008 03:01:23

      Comment: You are repeating your posts as if you are treating it like a news release. If you have nothing new to say, don't take up everyone's time in reviewing the same material. The effect of seeing the same post repeated again and again with your name attached has the effect of dumbing down your message.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/28/2008 2:47:27 AM

    Comment: THE CLINTON"S ARE JUST TO polarizing. Too many scandals, to many investigations. I do not believe they are guilty in all those scandals I just believe AMERICA needs a change from the establishment. We do not need a years worth of divisive campaigning. IT would be amazing to see McCain vs OBAMA. A GOOD CLEAN HEAVY WEIGHT FIGHT. NO ONE GETS THEIR EAR BIT OFF. A ROMNEY CAMpaign would be just like BUSH'S very divisive and full of lies. IF AMERICA CHOOSES THESE TWO CANDIDATES to represent their respective parties then I think the AMERICAN political process can begin to heal and set an example to the rest of the world. WHAT KIND OF MESSAGE ARE WE SENDING IRAQIS and AFGHANS. IF we promote racial divide why shoud they give us the benefit of the doubt concerning ABU GRADE and BLACK WATER. ARE WE REALLY RACIST CAN IT BE THAT THE CLINTON"S ARE A REFLECTION OF OUR SOCIETY. DIVIDE people so we the CLINTON'S can attain the power we are entitled too and so rightfully deserve after my conduct in the OVAL OFFICE. No one else is capable of being president. I will become nasty and play the race card because the "MEDIA" is trying to take away the presidency from me and my wife.

    • Posted By: Dr. Richard Trickle @ 01/28/2008 02:50:16

      Comment: Eddie... Slow down and proof read your work.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/28/2008 2:41:51 AM

    Comment: This is reality TED KENNEDY IS GOING TO ENDORSE OBAMA. CLINTON CANNOT CONTROL HIS URGES and THIS IS WHY GORE LOST the 2000 election. CLINTON feels that the media is taking the presidency away from him and his wife. It is this entitlement that is very worrisome to me. Bill needs to realize he messed up in a big way and that there are consequences to his uncontrollable urges. He has scared the democratic base with his wife's racial campaign. The only thing keeping the CLINTONS a float are the LATINO"S. As soon as OBAMA starts tapping into this vote he should be able to pull of the nomination. THE CLINTON"S ARE JUST TO polarizing.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/28/2008 2:41:32 AM

    Comment: Too many scandals, to many investigations. I do not believe they are guilty in all those scandals I just believe AMERICA needs a change from the establishment. We do not need a years worth of divisive campaigning. IT would be amazing to see McCain vs OBAMA. A GOOD CLEAN HEAVY WEIGHT FIGHT. NO ONE GETS THEIR EAR BIT OFF. A ROMNEY CAMpaign would be just like BUSH"S very divisive and full of lies. IF AMERICA CHOOSES THESE TWO CANDIDATES to represent their respective parties they I think the AMERICAN political process can begin to heal and set an example to the rest of the world. WHAT KIND OF MESSAGE ARE WE SENDING IRAQ'S and AFGHANS. IF we promote racial divide why shoud they give us the benefit of the doubt about ABU GRADE and BLACK WATER. ARE WE REALLY RACIST CAN IT BE THAT THE CLINTON"S ARE A REFLECTION OF OUR SOCIETY. DIVIDE people so we can get a hold power because we are entitled to it, no one else is caThis is reality TED KENNEDY IS GOING TO ENDORSE OBAMA. CLINTON CANNOT CONTROL HIS URGES and THIS IS WHY GORE LOST the 2000 election. CLINTON feels that the media is taking the presidency away from him and his wife. It is this entitlement that is very worrisome to me. Bill needs to realize he messed up in a big way and that there are consequences to his uncontrollable urges. He has scared the democratic base with his wife's racial campaign. The only thing keeping the CLINTONS a float are the LATINO"S. As soon as OBAMA starts tapping into this vote he should be able to pull of the nomination. THE CLINTON"S ARE JUST TO polarizing. Too many scandals, to many investigations. I do not believe they are guilty in all those scandals I just believe AMERICA needs a change from the establishment. We do not need a years worth of divisive campaigning. IT would be amazing to see McCain vs OBAMA. A GOOD CLEAN HEAVY WEIGHT FIGHT. NO ONE GETS THEIR EAR BIT OFF. A ROMNEY CAMpaign would be just like BUSH'S very divisive and full of lies. IF AMERICA CHOOSES THESE TWO CANDIDATES to represent their respective parties then I think the AMERICAN political process can begin to heal and set an example to the rest of the world. WHAT KIND OF MESSAGE ARE WE SENDING IRAQIS and AFGHANS. IF we promote racial divide why shoud they give us the benefit of the doubt concerning ABU GRADE and BLACK WATER. ARE WE REALLY RACIST CAN IT BE THAT THE CLINTON"S ARE A REFLECTION OF OUR SOCIETY. DIVIDE people so we the CLINTON'S can attain the power we are entitled too and so rightfully deserve after my conduct in the OVAL OFFICE. No one else is capable of being president. I will become nasty and play the race card because the "MEDIA" is trying to take away the presidency from me and my wife.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/28/2008 2:30:21 AM

    Comment: TED KENNEDY IS VERY WELL CONNECTED. ACLU, AFL CIO, not to mention his influence within the democratic ranks especially with Super delegates. DR. RICHARD you need to stick to medicine because we are discussing the democratic race. HOW COULD YOU SAY THAT KENNEDY ENDORSEMENT WILL NOT HELp OBAMA. IF OBAMA CAN GET GORE ON BOARD HE CAN COMpete in CALIFORNIA.

    • Posted By: lamm01 @ 01/28/2008 12:03:53

      Comment: What Senator Kennedy doesn't realize is that he has seriously "pi****ed" off his constituants in Massachusetts. As a supporter of Senators Kennedy and Kerry in the past, I as well as many will now vote for and support whoever is opposing them in future elections.

    • Posted By: Dr. Richard Trickle @ 01/28/2008 02:45:25

      Comment: 1st. Nom de plume. 2nd Word play. 3rd. Ted Kennedy? So what. Republicans are not going after Obama because they know he is the least likely candidate (as opposed to HIllary) to prevail against the Republican ticket. Republicans know Hillary is a threat and that is why they are seeking to destroy her now before the Democratic nomination.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/28/2008 2:23:26 AM

    Comment: This is reality TED KENNEDY IS GOING TO ENDORSE OBAMA. CLINTON CANNOT CONTROL HIS URGES and THIS IS WHY GORE LOST the 2000 election. CLINTON feels that the media is taking the presidency away from him and his wife. It is this entitlement that is very worrisome to me. Bill needs to realize he messed up in a big way and that there are consequences to his uncontrollable urges. He has scared the democratic base with his wife's racial campaign. The only thing keeping the CLINTONS a float are