Barack’s Rock

hey iron719,
why don't you back to your planet URANUS.

Thank you for the story about Michelle Obama. I am really glad to get to know her. However, as a woman, I find this story as uninspiring as it can be. So we have another intelligent, capable woman put herself behind this man and be his rock. This has been the same story over and over again since the beginning of time, as the ???first ladies??? chart you have in the article demonstrates. I understand that for her current role, Mrs. Obama is awesome. But for all the young women with great potential out there, is this the best we can ever be, staying behind the men? When can we take the lead, make changes on our initiatives, and have some men be our rocks for a change?

That, will be a news-worthy, inspirational story.

go Michelle! You're brilliant, and a great credit to Barack. And don't let anyone muzzle you. i know just what you mean about the first time you can be really proud to be an American - and child, I am a white woman who is so much older than you!
All the best,
Anne Williams
American citizen in London, UK

As a (male) Green Party member (after 10 years as a loyal Democrat), Barack Obama is the first potential Democratic nominee since 1992 for whom I would be able to vote in good conscience if he's nominated. I would love to vote for a woman for President if a deserving candidate was considered, but Hillary Clinton is absolutely NOT that candidate. I was an active member of NOW for several years in the early 90's and I was pleased to read Kate Michelman's endorsement article for Obama recently. NY-NOW's attacks against Ted Kennedy for endorsing Obama instead of Clinton, accusing him of "betraying all women" were entirely nonsensical and slanderous. Michelle Obama will make a superlative First Lady if Barack is elected, and as a very tough critic, I trust that he will wipe the floor with McCain if nominated. The more closely I watch Hillary's conduct on the campaign trail (including nearly every debate & rally), notwithstanding the underhanded sideswipes from former President Clinton, the more disgusted I get with her (as well as Bill). I truly wish I could respect her, but she clearly hasn't a single intellectually honest bone in her body. I find it entirely impossible to trust her, besides her disingenuous rationales for her vote for the war in Iraq. This hideous vote was the tip of the iceberg. Barack has always impressed me as genuinely intellectually honest, as well as Michelle speaking from the heart. If Clinton is nominated, the Democrats can virtually guarantee handy defeat in November, as the only success she will have is in uniting the GOP against her to stomp her into the ground. Barack's wealth of experience using sound judgment & wisdom makes him amply qualified to lead this country into the new millenium. He moved to Chicago to work as a civil rights lawyer & community organizer, then taught Constitutional law as a professor for 10 years. Hillary Clinton voted for the USA PATRIOT Act, John Ashcroft's confirmation as Attorney General, along with Alberto Gonzales & appointment of John Roberts & Sam Alito the Supreme Court. If any of you think she'll protect our civil liberties, I have a lovely bridge to sell you in San Francisco. I will vote Green in November, as I have since 1996, if anyone but Barack is nominated. This comes from someone who supported Dennis Kucinich in 2004 & this year till he left the race.

The media went so easy for Obama, that is why they (the Obamas)think they can say anything even the things they said that contemns this very proud country, which gave them much more than they deserved.

Army4RangeR , you are a disgrace. "Black people are only voting for Obama because of race"? This election has to do with CHARACTER more than anything else. When 75% of Blacks voted for Clinton in 1996, was it only because of race? Did 75% of Black people vote for Al Sharpton in 2004? The Clintons have shown a side of themselves that has really turned people off. In case you had your head in the sand for the past 2 years, America wants CHANGE. Explain to me how recycling an old political name will get us the change that we're looking for ? This is America; we aren't into family dynasties. We elected Bush based on his last name and look what that got us. Hillary trumpets "experience" but the reality is that this Senate seat of hers is her FIRST elected position. Barack has held public office for more than 12 years. This means something when you see how she doesn't take responsibility for her Iraq war vote MISTAKE the way that John Edwards did. She wants to seat the delegates of Florida and Michigan after signing a pledge from with the DNC that these delegates would not count in the election. Is that good character ? Dont you ever insult Black people by insinuating that we are just based on race. Issues matter to everyone. We send our children to war, we pay taxes, we have mortgages, and we dream for a better day just like you.

One of the commenters here referenced a website that people should visit. That website is some "crap" that someone created to try to "shoot down" the person for whom THEY don't want to vote. Don't vote for him then! Let's all understand something here. Some of you are Hillary supporters. Vote for Hillary. Others of us are Obama supporters. We'll vote for Obama. NO ONE has to convince me (nor anyone else who really does want something different in this country) that with all the technical know how people possess you can make someone appear anyway you want them to appear. The man hasn't even become the party's nominee yet and you want to "Swiftboat" him. For shame! I'm personally no more interested in a bunch of crap people "dig up" because they don't want to vote for someone, than I am interested in seeing the same kind of stuff about the opponent because I want to vote AGAINST him or her. No question about the fact that whatever you could find about Obama, Hillary (G-U-A-R-A-N-T-E-E-D!) will have TWICE as much (especially having lived a third longer and having "35 years of experience!" Give it a rest! Obama bashers, you're only testifying to each other! Clinton bashers -- you're doing the same thing! What a waste. I'm an Obama supporter but you won't find me throwing rocks at Clinton because I'm FOR Obama. Some (troubled) people can't be satisfied to cast THEIR OWN vote for the candidate of their choice, they want to cast the votes of OTHERS as well (like a Superdelegate). Why don't you then go to work on one of the campaigns? You voted, your voice was heard, so let others have their say. We will speak with a collective voice when it's all over. A candidate has a message of "hope' and 'change' and those who are naysayers don't like it. DON'T VOTE FOR HIM THEN! We who DO vote him won't cry about it! I agree with Recia, if he can make even HALF the change he talks about, that will put us light years ahead of what we've had over the last 7+ years. Be an adult and let things run their course. Again, YOUR vote is YOUR voice. Someone said earlier when speaking about Obama to not believe everything you hear -- well that applies to EVERY candidate. More importantly, the same is true of what you READ (especially on some irresponsible website by someone that no one knows!)

There are three candidates running for the White House, Billary (The Clintonian Dynasty, yesterday was Bill, next year Hillary for eight years, afterwards Chelsea will do 8 more years - Nepotism, monarchy, etc spelled all over it, failed mandated universial healthcare plan which couldn't pass when Bill was in office for 8 years, now she is trying to slam it down American's throats again, ) , John McCain (nuckle head, fip flooper, stay in Iraq for 100 years... I am a conservative, yesterday I was a moderate, I promise won't raise your taxes) or Barack, new face, new ideas, bring all parties together, change, roll up our sleeves and let's all work together and get this country back on the right track!!! The way I see it is that the answer is SIMPLE!! Barack OBama!!!! I don't like what I see with the dirty, slimy political tactics of the Clintonians!!! They consistently take plays out of the Republican playbook. McCain is Bush, Hillary is Bush...just a democratic Bush!!!

She's the one who keeps him real, the one who makes sure running for the leader of the free world doesn't go to his head....She is the one who said " this is the first time in her adult life she has been proud of this country...Not the kind of statement this country wants to hear from it's First Lady....Voters should take another look!!!

NOBAMA

The Clintons have mentioned recently how qualified the entire original field of DEM candidates for President was this year; and I couldn't agree more. However, the truth is that among that field, Sen. Clinton has never been the most qualified to effect any type of meaningful change or to clean up after anyone's Presidential mess again except maybe Bill Clinton's.

Go ask the Gay & Lesbian Activists how "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" is working for them. That is a "Solution-Clinton Style". Our men and women in the Armed Forces, after having been promised full and complete integration of openly gay and lesbian warriors based upon the successful model of the U.K., were abandoned once The Clintons faced predictable REP/CONS opposition. We were told to accept this policy as progress and the best solution; and today our defenders who happen to be gay or lesbian still are isolated from govt resources in a very lonely decision to "tell if not asked" or "stay silent in personal denial" some 16+ years after the fact.

Most solutions were like this, so brokered over with the REPS/CONS and the Gingrich Congress which seemed to have the better negotiators that the resulting policy or legislation rarely resembled the policy goals of the original DEM core constituency.

And like Universal Health care, being defeated in your first 6 months of the Administration is understandable for young idealists, new to Washington; but what explains why they never re-introduced it in their remaining 7-1/2 years in The White House? If it was so important, and if they are so tough for us; then why did they rotate to thousands of other pieces of legislation during their two terms after being defeated on Universal Health Care in the first 6 months?

So please say "No" to a Clinton-led National Ticket with the strong possibility of an embarrassing defeat erasing the DEM House majority balanced against the potential upside of 4 more years of brokered, "triangulated" legislative deals with REPS/CONS that The Clintons pass off on us as progress...

....and "Yes" to a broader DEM party that takes back the White House with ease and ushers in a new working Congressional Majority with additional House and Senate seats assuring that the new DEM President can unapologetically enact a truly Progressive Legislative Agenda....not another series of brokered REP/CONS deals.

I am a risk management professional; and if ever the potential downside does not justify the potential gain; it is the HRC Presidential Ambition; unless of course your name is Bill, Hillary, Chelsea, or any number of thousands of supporters in politics like so many superdelegates that owe their jobs in the Democratic Party apparatus to The Clintons (Begala, Carville, Lani Davis, et. al many of whom are ALSO SUPERDELEGATES as well as commentators), the PACS, the media, and private industry in line to bribe The Clintons for payback in return for their support now.

"Why even entertain putting the entire DEM Congressional contingent, particularly in red and purple states, under a Clinton-led banner to draw that type of heat, unnecessarily, when there is an option that would achieve the exact opposite effect and possibly help grow the Congressional majority, what he calls a working majority for change.

This is what The Clintons are jeopardizing with every attack of Obama; and they know it.

They would prefer a loss like they did 4 years ago, in order to stay relevant with HRC in the wings as the eventual Party Savior whenever we come to our senses. Think that's a stretch?

Well, do you remember Bill Clinton campaigning this hard for John Kerry to save us from the last 4 years; or do you remember him chummig it up with the entire Bush Clan at their Presidential Libraries giving that REP dynasty much needed credibility and softening the Bush brand?

We know they are this selfish and narcissistic. That's not news; but what about us? We have to be different. Obama's not Jesus; but he is adequate-enough for what we want done unless we allow The Clintons to destroy him while rationalizing that we still want them and their tortured, half-baked political deals and compromised legislation. that they spin to us as progress and a solution.

Go ask the Gay & Lesbian Activists how "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" is working for them. That is a "Solution-Clinton Style". Our men and women in the Armed Forces, after having been promised full and complete integration of openly gay and lesbian warriors based upon the successful model of the U.K., were abandoned once The Clintons faced predictable REP/CONS opposition. We were told to accept this policy as progress and the best solution; and today our defenders who happen to be gay or lesbian still are isolated from govt resources in a very lonely decision to "tell if not asked" or "stay silent in personal denial" some 16+ years after the fact.

The Clintons have mentioned recently how qualified the entire original field of DEM candidates for President was this year; and I couldn't agree more. However, the truth is that among that field, Sen. Clinton has never been the most qualified to effect any type of meaningful change or to clean up after anyone's Presidential mess again except maybe Bill Clinton's.

And do we really want to go into this Fall campaign as the party that wants to put Bill Clinton back in The White House again? I think Wisconsin, Texas, AND Ohio will have their own answers for that; but let me put it another way:

The Republican Party has controlled presidential politics and the lever of power over the Executive Branch of Government ever since mid-way through The Clintons' second term in the White House with a broad-based coalition of REPS and INDS.

That offended and embarrassed majority will likely reject very strongly any effort that helps Bill Clinton get anywhere near The White House again under any circumstances whatsoever, even and including to "supposedly" clean up after another Bush. It just will be met with overwhelming rejection even if that sentiment is not seen or heard now....

.....and even if The Clintons can pull it off, they will probably narrow if not erase altogether the Congressional DEM majority in the House for sure and be doomed to 4 years almost like the last two they spent in the White House.

Why must we all maintain this veil of silence about the Senator's claims of experiences as they try to present her 8 years as First Lady as practice for the Presidency. She is so obviously the running mate in this campaign that has apparently been completely taken over by her husband's handlers. At times it often appears as though she isn't being allowed to think or even campaign for herself; and that she is doomed to being nothing but a figurehead, like Queen Elizabeth presiding over the 2nd Bill Clinton Administration. Why?

And before you say that wasn't so bad; let me remind you how tough The Clintons were during their first 8 years in The White House and what their "solutions" actually got us DEMS.

Why even think about taking that kind of risk for two people who delivered us NAFTA, "Don't Ask/Don't Tell", The Gingrich Welfare Reform Act, and an entire litany of half-baked apples posing as "Solutions" that in most cases, have only exacerbated the problems these "triangulated compromises" were supposed to resolve.

And let's not forget to thank them for explosive growth of The Prison Industrial Complex ushered in by their crime bill that featured mandatory sentencing, the removal of judges' discretion, and disparate sentences for crack and cocaine offenses? Why?

By all accounts, the Dot.com boom is over and Robert Rubin & Alan Greenspan aren't coming back either to manage the economy while The Clintons triangulate and cut deals with REPS to stay in power and protect their own approval ratings.