Dems choose Obama in thunderous acclamation
Yahoo News by David Espo, AP Special Correspondent Wed Aug 27, 7:18 PM ET
Clinton's call for Obama to be approved by acclamation ??? midway through the traditional roll call of the states ??? was the culmination of a painstaking agreement worked out between the two camps to present a unified front.
My commentary:
So, democrats, in order to portray a false unification, schemed to allow politics to trump the democratic process.
And they are insulted when people don???t refer to them as the democrat(ic) party!
Yes, the truth is offensive to the democrat party!
LIVING POLITICS
Union Dues
Barack Obama hasn't made the sale with blue-collar Democrats or Hillary supporters. And some Democrats are worried.
Aug 25, 2008 | Updated: 10:00 p.m. ET Aug 25, 2008
-
Posted By: Davole @ 08/28/2008 6:24:18 PM
-
Posted By: ICYEYES800 @ 08/27/2008 12:38:37 AM
WHY is everyone suddenly so interested in Cindy McCain's money???? It is HERS...We didn't hear any of this crap when Kerry was in the same position...and he's got tons more money than Cindy...Just Euro trash with tons of $$$$$attraction for Kerry....We didn't hear about the many, many houses he and his lovely wife own all around the world...their favorite is in the Swiss Alps....And then we have the Teddy Kennedy saga..I have absolutely NO USE for that poor excuse of a person...HE KILLED a woman, supposedly an accident, but the unfortunately never recoverd her body(supposedly because she was pregnant and he was married) how convenient...also, the majority of his money is stashed away in banks in FIJI where he can escape the taxes that you and I PAY WILLINGLY!!!!!!! So, get over how many houses the McCain's have....It make you all look shallow and narrow minded.....I have a cousin, who didn't graduate high school, but went back and got her GED, went on to become a very successful realtor and owns 6 houses...SO, the story is, if you can't make it in AMerica, you can't make it anywhere, so quit whinning about McCain's houses...It's a NON ISSUE...
-
Posted By: m921 @ 08/28/2008 4:53:20 PM
YOU ARE RIGHT, THE NUMBER OF HOUSES IS NOT THE ISSUE. YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT THE ISSUE IS HOW MCCAIN CAN TRY TO PAINT OBAMA AS ELISTIST WHEN IN FACT HE HAS A WIFE WORTH 100 MILLION, 500 DOLLARS SHOES, ETC. ITS THE IRONY THAT IS THE POINT HERE NOT THE NUMBER OF HOUSES.
-
-
Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 08/27/2008 3:32:58 PM
NO BOUNCE FOR OBAMA EVEN AFTER THE MICHELLE AND CLINTON SPEECHES! HMMM COULD IT BE THAT EVERYONE SAW THAT MICHELLE'S WAS A SCRIPT AND THAT CLINTON BARELY ENDORSED OBAMA (NEVER SAYING HE WAS READY TO LEAD THIS COUNTRY OR THAT SHE THOUGHT HE WAS!) WITH GOOD OLE BILL SPEAKING TONITE THERE WON'T BE A BOUNCE IN THE FUTURE EITHER! BILL CLINTON WILL NOT LET ANYONE TELL HIM WHAT HE WILL SAY IN A SPEECH AND YOU COULD BET HE WILL SAY WHAT THE OBAMA CAMP DON'T WANT YOU TO HEAR (ITS PART OF THE CLINTON PLAN!)
-
Posted By: m921 @ 08/28/2008 4:43:31 PM
dO NOT BE AN IDIOT. DON'T YOU KNOW NEARLY EVERYONE IS SCRIPTED. IF MCCAIN IS NOT THE ONLY THING WE WILL HERE IS ABOUT HIS POW EXPEREINCE.
-
-
Posted By: histchem111 @ 08/27/2008 2:22:23 PM
As a Roman Catholic Democrat, with 3 degrees (BA-History, BS-Chemistry and MS - Chemistry), I think I can consider myself a somewhat educated Catholic therefore I take issue with the article's condescending attitude towards "less educated Catholics". However, on to my more important point: The choice of Joe Biden as VP running mate will not automatically reel Catholic Democrats into the Obama camp. Obama's stanceson abortion and same sex "marriage" are clearly obnoxious to Catholics and Obama's elitist thinking that he can sucker Catholics into voting for him on issues of the economy while ignoring moral issues could be his election downfall.
-
Posted By: ttate @ 08/28/2008 9:47:46 AM
With the state of our economy, a war we will be in debt for (and can't seen to get out of) for unknown years to come, environmental issues I cannot believe people are still talking about a candidates stance on abortion or sam sex marriage! People, we have some very serious issues and you're talking trivialities. Who freaking cares! As an adoptee I have some opinions on abortion that have NOTHING to do with religion, but I don't believe others (especially men) have the right to ban it. I'm a hetersuxual mother of four and Nana of three little girls, and I couldn't care less if someone in my neighborhood is gay or (gasp!) married to a same sex partner. I'm worried about the future of the country and the world because my kids and grandkids will be around long after I'm gone. Can we discuss some REAL ISSUES finally???
-
-
Posted By: pbc @ 08/28/2008 9:20:02 AM
to the Blue collar workers, middle class folks,Hillary supporters and union folks that seem hesitant to throw their full support behind Obama-WHAT ARE YOU THINKING? Whether has defined himself to your liking, whether he has defined his plans to your satisfaction or whether he was or was not your first choice, Ask yourself this-Will John McCAin and his republican cohorts do ANYTHING to make your life better? You know they will not . All you have to do to know that is compare the last 8 years under Bush to the 8 years before that with Clinton and the Democrats in charge. Obama is youir only choice like it or not. Now get out there and support him and make your future brighter. This country cannot suffer 4 more years of the same as the last 8.
-
Posted By: myopinion1 @ 08/27/2008 8:18:24 PM
Why is it so hard for Team Obama to lay down their swords and reach out to Clinton voters?
Frankly- It's REALLY LATE to be doing this.
The actions that speak louder than words are that we are not valued and do not matter to Obama's campaign.
Some will go elsewhere because of it.
Hillary Clinton did the Democratic Party if not Obama a HUGE favor with her killer speech that did unite us last night.
What a different convention and race we would have if she were the VP pick.
The bottom line is Obama himself is responsible for truly uniting the democratic party.
Thus far he has failed.
-
Posted By: careerdaytrader @ 08/27/2008 11:44:20 AM
If you're like me there are THREE ISSUES this election that matter most!
Economy - John Mc Cain clearly wins. Lower taxes encourage savings and investment which create jobs. Sending money to Washington to waste takes it out of your local communities and makes no sense. And since the richest top 10% pay 2/3 of ALL Taxes now I agree with Obama "It's a matter of FAIRNESS" and the rich already pay TOO MUCH.
Economists AGREE with Mc Cain's plan, don't take my word go read the experts opinions. Obama isn't going to create 5 million jobs he will create an economic NIGHTMARE. We should be calling him Barak "FREDDY KRUGER" Obama.
http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2008/07/21/daily63.html
Stock Market - Most of us whether we like it or not have money invested in stocks. Your 401k, IRAs, etc, etc are in the stock market. Obama's tax policies will hurt the stock market and rob you of your money and you will have LESS money for retirement or your kids college.
http://www.reuters.com/article/wtMostRead/idUSN2143994620080723
IRAQ WAR - I don't want our troups in Iraq any more than you do. But the fact is we're there, we were probably lied to about the war and it sucks. Agreed! However we're there so lets win it and create Democracy in the Middle East. This will be a good LONG TERM thing and will cause more stability which causes the oil futures markets to price LESS into the cost of oil the potential for DISRUPTIONS! That's how it works people.-
Posted By: TheVigil @ 08/27/2008 8:00:39 PM
You're naive, stupid, and utterly ignorant if you think Iraq has any of the equipment necessary to sustain a modern democratic state.
Iraq is a failed colonial division drawn up after the WWII partitions of the Middle East. Political scholars across the board agree that historically, democracy has nearly NEVER flourished except in the presence of a strong middle class, as well as a strong national identity. Iraq doesn't have any of these things. Its identities are based on religious and racial identity and regularly split down sectarian lines. It doesn't have a middle class; what educated people it had mostly all left when the war started. Its people have fundamental learning blocks against democracy, don't understand what it is, and don't want us there. Even the provisional government that *we installed* wants us out.
What you're espousing is just the same old idealistic and really naive rhetoric that got us into Iraq in the first place. The best solution I've ever heard to the problem involves a three-state solution, one for Sunnis, one for Shiites, and one for Kurds. But most Americans don't study political science and don't understand this idea; they want to "spread democracy" in a totally self-righteous way in the Middle East. What most people are basically saying is "we want the Iraqis to be like us" - they're not going to.
As far as your economic policies, I just don't have time to point out the established errors in your thinking. Check the other threads where I've debunked your notions that taxes always equal an economic slowdown. You still haven't looked up the concept of X-inefficiency, I guess - in layman's terms, "corruption and waste" - which properly placed taxes reduce the harm from. You still believe that every corporation acts in ways that are fundamentally decent and pass on both tax breaks and tax costs to the consumers. This is far from the case. CEOs and other executives actively work towards monopolistic policy (I've seen this from the inside of a meeting room several times) to the detriment of quality and customer service and frequently vote themselves astronomical salaries. This may not change with increased taxes, but at least more of the money will be restored to wider economic circulation. Right now a lot of corporations are feeding off the middle class - and shooting *themselves* in the foot in the long run. They're impoverishing their own customer base, and the economy is suffering as a result.
And if you rehash that tired garbage about how we're "still experiencing growth", take the record profits of the oil companies out of the equation and look at the numbers again. The vast majority of the economy is severely weakened.
-
-
Posted By: ssbn777 @ 08/26/2008 7:50:38 AM
Working Democrats should be concerned. The Liberal Left has hijacked the party. The Democrats aren't for the "working class" anymore. They haven't been for a while. Democrats are all about minorities now; ethnocentric special interests; and the welfare class. They've basically acted to empower the poor, while screwing everybody else, including their former base -- hard-working, law-abiding, blue collar men and women. They would rather prop up persons of foreign nationality, that your average working Joe. Heck, look at their Presidential candidate! He couldn't be more un-American. (and no, that's not because he's black -- he has little in common with your average African American, being raised in exotic foreign countries and going to some of the most expensive schools money can buy)
-
Posted By: chicago blues @ 08/26/2008 8:45:50 AM
ssbn777: I think you clearly emphasize the problem that exists in the corners of Pennsylvania, Ohio, the South and other parts of the nation that fail to embrace Obama as the best choice for president and change. It's the fact that deep down, the Obamas represent achievement at the highest pinnacles of society, and you have failed to make that connection yourself. It's probably hard to swallow that the Obama's, like the Clintons, came from working class roots, but worked their bottoms off to get top notch educations and to position themselves on center stage in our country's political arena. Is this path so un-American -- that is, being raised on the South Side of Chicago (which I lived) and making it to the top colleges and graduate schools in the world? Isn't that what every parent aspires for their children? I'm african -american and from the South. I married into an ethnic punjabi family. And guess what -- what unites us is that same set of core working class values. We attended Notre Dame, Chicago, Princeton, Harvard and Virginia (not on scholarship but with student loans). Some of us are in the armed services and have done tour duty in Iraq. But moreover, the bond we share is our vision of a similar life of hard work, dedication, sacrifice and patriotism for our children. Is it wrong for anyone but natural born white american citizens to have such aspirations and be a part of the broader Democratic party? Is this the way you see and reconcile our nation -- as`divided? If so, it clearly brings us back to my first point, which is the challenge that you have with any other citizens, other than your own choice of citizens, as being able to come from the backbone of American ( the ghettos, the factories, etc) and still being able to climb into prosperity with a little elbow grease,discipline and conviction. The Clinton's did it, as their background is not so dissimilar to the Obama's, and I don't see you criticizing them. With their millions and Ivy League law degrees, it's hard not to paint them as elitists, and out of touch with working class voters. Bill Clinton was working class as a kid, but never, never as a student at Georgetown and then on. And need I mention he was a Rhodes Scholar? Did not Chelsea attende Stanford, work at McKinsey and be rasied in accordance to upper class standards of success and fitting for the daughter of two Ivy Leaguers. How dare you blast the Obama's rightful place in the Democratic party unless you are willing to blast all other Dems who have represented this party - the Clintons, Gores, Kerry's, Edwards, Carters, etc. They all share some of the same stories, some similar values, and they all make and embrace and are valid members of this great Democratic party. I think you need a new direction.
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/26/2008 9:25:12 AM
The problem with your premise is that you assume Obama is more "credentialed" than Clinton.
If, as you say, they both have the same educational background, then her experience in the real world makes her the better candidate because she actually worked in production jobs alongside the kind of voters Obama can't connect with, she actually worked with women to establish a real foundation for peace in Ireland, actually practiced law and worked for women and children, garnering awards for her efforts, the list of HRC's accomplishments is too long to itemize here, and doesn't make any difference now. Obama appealed to black voters who saw him as an answer to the African-American dream and cut Hillary Clinton to shreds in order to make sure he was the nominee, and now he is reaping the division they have sown.
What did he expect HRC to do, just bow out and not even run? He knew better. And now he will lose and the dream won't be realized. He should have waited. He would have learned so much as her VP, which would itself have been the realization of an African-American dream, and would have put the democrats in line for sixteen years in the white house. But he was too impatient, to self focused.
The democratic party will never be the same again. Obama is taking it too far left of center to be viable in the future. And pushing the Clintons toward the exit is just plain stupid.-
Posted By: coach740 @ 08/26/2008 9:57:12 AM
Hillary was not cut to shreds. She just lost. She did most of the cutting and slamming and it is coming back in McCain ads. Hillary is a leader, but the people chose Barack over her. That is a fact. Whinning is not going to fix the problems the country has. Getting behind the Democratic candidate against Bush/McCain will fix the problem and move us to where we need to be as a country.
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/26/2008 11:57:05 AM
Obama won't fix the problems this country has, he is only interested in getting elected, not in improving anything for anyone else. Name one thing he has done to improve his community with his own money. Here's what I know about Obama and working for his community. The law firm that hired Obama put him to work organizing "community" partners for Rezko's failed housing projects, which took millions from taxpayers and put them in the developer's pockets and left them with slum housing that went bankrupt and was boarded up. The billing records may not have shown that Obama was working directly for Rezko, but without the "community" partners, Rezko wouldn't have gotten the millions in taxpayer money.
-
Posted By: raddave @ 08/26/2008 5:27:32 PM
Obama worked as a community organizer BEFORE he went to law school, so he was not hired by a law firm to "organizing partners for Rezko."
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/27/2008 3:11:30 PM
Obama failed as a community organizer and did nothing that helped the community, although he did try to take credit for getting asbestos removed from some of the low income housing.
The work Obama was doing at the law firm was representing Rezko's partners in the failed low income housing deals. He was NEVER a civil rights lawyer, no matter what he says on his web site and how many times he makes the claim. There isn't a single civil rights lawsuit out there with his name on it.-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/27/2008 3:14:09 PM
Even though Illinois ethics disclosure forms are designed to reveal possible financial conflicts by lawmakers, on disclosure forms for 2001 and 2002, Obama did not specify that a Blackwell company involved (EKI) provided him with the bulk of the private-sector compensation he received. Instead, as was his custom, he attached a multi-page list of all the law firm's clients, which included EKI among hundreds. Illinois law does not require more specific disclosure.
Stanley Brand, a Washington lawyer who counsels members of Congress and others on ethics rules, said he would have advised a lawmaker in Obama's circumstances to separately disclose such a singularly important client and not simply include it on a list of hundreds of firm clients, even if the law does not explicitly require it. "I would say you should disclose that to protect and insulate yourself against the charge that you are concealing it," Brand said.
Obama's tax returns show that he made no money from his law practice in 2000, the year of his unsuccessful run for a congressional seat. But that changed in 2001, when Obama reported $98,158 income for providing legal services. Of that, $80,000 was from Blackwell's company.
In 2002, the state senator reported $34,491 from legal services and speeches. Of that, $32,000 came from the EKI legal assignment, which ended in April 2002 by mutual agreement, as Obama ceased the practice of law and looked ahead to the possibility of running for the U.S. Senate. .
Obama's spokesman said that listing all clients was appropriate and that doing so allowed the public to see any and all potential conflicts for Obama and his law firm colleagues. "He was especially mindful of this responsibility as a leader of ethics reform," said Gibbs, his chief campaign spokesman.
A few months after receiving his final payment from Blackwell's company, EKI, Obama sent a request on state Senate letterhead urging Illinois officials to provide a $50,000 tourism promotion grant to another Blackwell company, Killerspin.
Though Obama's formal efforts consisted of writing a letter and a proclamation, the nitty-gritty of obtaining state grants fell to a former state Senate and campaign aide to Obama, Dan Shomon.
Shomon, working part time for Obama's campaign and for Killerspin, helped prepare Killerspin's initial grant application in 2002. Still working part time with Obama, Shomon helped Killerspin secure a $200,000 grant for its 2003 tournament and a $100,000 grant for its 2004 tournament.
Nice return on Blackwell's "investment" in Obama. So much for Obama's sense of ethics and transparency.-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/27/2008 3:46:45 PM
Interestingly, Obama also misrepresented the sources of his income during this period in his interview with the Sun Times reporters:
Q: You're managing partner said you didn't leave the firm until you went to the U.S. Senate.
A: I stopped working at the firm as an associate when I went to the state senate in 1997, I became "of counsel" and for probably sporadically in the subsequent years would do some work over the summers with the firm or when I wasn't either in Springfield or teaching at the University of Chicago. I think it's fair to say that just about all the work that I billed had to do with litigation on civil rights cases and appellate work so it was entirely
separate form all the transactional [real estate/ neighborhood redevelopment] work that was done.
-
-
-
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/26/2008 12:00:35 PM
Obama is the unnamed "political candidate" referred to in a section of the document that accuses Rezko of orchestrating a scheme in which a firm hired to handle state teacher pension investments first had to pay $250,000 in "sham" finder's fees. From that money, $10,000 was donated to Obama's successful run for the Senate in the name of a Rezko business associate, according to the court filing and the source.
Rezko, who was part of Obama's senatorial finance committee, also is accused of directing "at least one other individual" to donate money to Obama and then reimbursing that individual -- in possible violation of federal election law.
Obama donated more than $44,000 in Rezko-linked contributions to charity last year, including the $10,000 donation mentioned in the court filing.
That money was donated to Obama by Joseph Aramanda, a Glenview businessman and Rezko associate who, sources have said, is the ???Individual D??? prosecutors say received the $250,000 in finder???s fees demanded by Rezko. Individual D did nothing to earn those fees, according to prosecutors.
The $10,000 contribution to Obama was given in Aramanda???s name on March 5, 2004, records show. While Obama???s camp has said the senator did not know Aramanda, Obama???s office hired Aramanda???s son as an intern in 2005, at Rezko???s urging.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/749138,obama20web.article-
Posted By: raddave @ 08/26/2008 5:32:40 PM
Way to cherry pick info out of an article to make it look like Obama is a crook. You forgot the paragraph at the beginning that states. "The Illinois senator isn???t accused of any wrongdoing. And there???s no evidence Obama knew contributions to his 2004 U.S. Senate campaign came from schemes Rezko is accused of orchestrating. "
you also fail to mention the part of the article that said Obama returned the money.-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/27/2008 3:15:44 PM
That just means that he wasn't indicted, not that he wasn't involved or guilty. He took the money and Rezko set it up. Go read his interview for yourself and see if you believe him. I don't.
-
-
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/26/2008 12:02:18 PM
"The one area where [Rezko] did have a political interest in Springfield that emerged - this is all pre-Blagojevich - was gaming. He was one of the minority investors in Rosemont. That's one area where he could have asked me for favors, but did not, partly because I was clearly on record as being opposed. I was a gaming opponent as [Sun-Times Springfield Bureau Chief] Dave McKinney will recall." - Obama
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/844597,transcript031508.article
Barack Obama angered fellow Democrats in the Illinois Senate when he voted to strip millions of dollars from a child welfare office on Chicago's West Side. But Obama had a ready explanation: He goofed. "I was not aware that I had voted no," he said that day in June 2002, asking that the record be changed to reflect that he "intended to vote yes."
On March 19, 1997, Obama announced he had fumbled an election-reform vote the day before, on a measure that passed 51 to 6: "I was trying to vote yes on this, and I was recorded as a no," he said.
On March 20, 1997, Obama voted "present" on a key telecommunications vote.
HEY CWA members, WAKE UP and smell the TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA.
He stood on March 11, 1999, to take back his vote against legislation to end good-behavior credits for certain felons in county jails. "I pressed the wrong button on that," he said.
He was the lone dissenter on Feb. 24, 2000, against 57 yeas for a ban on human cloning. "I pressed the wrong button by accident," he said.
On Nov. 14, 1997, he backed legislation to permit riverboat casinos to operate even when the boats were dockside. The measure, pushed by the gambling industry and fought by church groups whose support Obama was seeking, passed with two "yeas" to spare -- including Obama's. He wasn't exactly up front with his constituency, telling a church group on a 1998 campaign questionnaire that he was "undecided" about whether he backed an expansion of riverboat gambling. The senator who led the opposition to the gambling measure, Republican Todd Sieben, said "He was obviously paying attention to this vote. It was a major, major issue in the state, and it was a long debate," Sieben said. "The inadvertent 'Oops, I missed the switch' -- I'd be kind of skeptical of that."
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-obamavotes24jan24,0,4956975,full.story?coll=la-home-center
-
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/26/2008 11:53:21 AM
sorry, but that just isn't true. Obama ran a negative campaign from the first. He may not have spouted the negative things from his own mouth, but you claim he was in charge of the whole campaign, so I attribute the negative fliers and negative half-truths his campaign spread about Bill and Hillary Clinton to him. His campaign spread fliers that claimed Bill was a crook and worse about Hillary. His campaign adopted a strategy of inviting republicans to become democrats for a day just to defeat HRC in the primaries. His campaign made race an issue.
But that isn't my biggest problem with Obama. I won't vote for a man who admits using cocaine for years.
-
-
Posted By: chicago blues @ 08/26/2008 10:13:08 AM
More credential than Clinton is debatable. I guess it depends on what your yardstick is. I think your challenge and the problem that you present with your posts is that for some reason, you view Hillary Clinton as an heir to the throne of the Democratic party, and that all african americans should have rallied behind her.
Vut lets give credit where credit is due. Hillary has made exceptional gains for women and this country. I read the bios; I've seen the history that she has made over the span of her life. She's quite admirable. ct. But Obama did not cut her to threads so much as Bill Clinton and Hillary felt that somehow their credentials, outlook and legacy experience made them owners of the black vote in America.
Politics is what it is. The black vote, which is many cases in the Southern black vote, has helped the democratics win many an election in the past, including both of Clinton's terms. What happened plain and simple was that the black vote, initially up for grabs, was seized by Obama, not so much because he is a black man in america or the most experience candidate through legacy connections. But mainly because the Clinton's managed to marginalize and debunk the fact that a black person in america could in fact realize the american dream of becoming president, before they had their final shots at it.
It is sad but the Clinton's tried to take away our comunity's hope, by telling us that it was "fairytale", and that only they could deliver that hope to us. This line of thinking may have cost Hillary a lot of black Southern votes because why should Obama have to be second best, or wait his turn when he worked hard and did everything that was required to gain his position on center stage? What rulebook says so, and is that the gauge for the American dream for any ethnic minorty (including Latinos, Asians, etc.)?
If you do not want to vote Obama on election day, then don't vote for him. If you view Hillary as the only chance for a united and prospering America based on your terms, then you have a weighted decision come November.
Keep in mind that in many minds, whether he wins or loses, Obama and his family have already won the hearts of many americans, including african americans and the very strong base of loyal democrats that this country embraces. We would hate to see your biased character views prevent us all from making this a better America, a democratic party that still wholeheartedly embraces the Clintons (and who will be watching Hillary's speech tonight) as we make our strongest case to winning back the White House.-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/26/2008 10:43:11 AM
The southern black vote hasn't carried a state for a democrat in many many years, and it won't carry those states this year either.
Obama is reaping what he has sown. He chose to make race an issue in order to undermine African-American support for HRC, who has always been stronger in the polls, even now, against the republican candidates. He did not care about the democratic party, all he cared about was himself.-
Posted By: max in fl @ 08/26/2008 11:34:00 AM
Less of a risk. Bush Jr came into office hell bent on finishing what his father started. McCain has a chip on his shoulder. They have his helmet and uniform on display. If you don't think he DOESN'T have alot of ground to make up....let say winning a war at all cost sums it up. Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran is a close second (Why would McCan't be president joke like that). Oh I get we can't take a joke right. Let's have a terrorist org sing that and see how hard we would laugh..
-
Posted By: max in fl @ 08/26/2008 11:18:20 AM
He is taking a shot like anyone else. We get it, you like HRC. We both know that there is more to it you savvy.
-
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/26/2008 10:48:42 AM
The "fairytale" comment was taken totally out of context by the Obama campaign and used to portray Bill Clinton as a racist when in fact he was referring to Obama's claim that he was even in a position to oppose the bill authorizing the use of force in Iraq. it is just one example of Obama's clear intent to bring race into the primaries, and now the general election.
"Race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now" -- Barack Obama -
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/26/2008 10:46:30 AM
They don't embrace the Clintons "wholeheartedly" -- Barack didn't even give her the same courtesy he gave the male VP candidates by letting them know personally that he had not selected them. Barack shunned Bill and portrayed him as a racist in order to solidify the African American vote behind him, solely on the basis of race, without regard to what was best for the party or the nation.
We can not afford to let him divide our country the way he has divided the democratic party. I am a life long democrat, but will not vote for Obama. McCain is less of a risk, he won't be able to do anything without approval from the democrats in congress.
-
-
-
-
Posted By: coach740 @ 08/26/2008 9:51:26 AM
Who are you kidding? Do you really think McCain is for the common, blue-collar worker? He has no intention of helping anyone in the middle class with health care, college, puttiing money into public education so everyone can succeed. No, he wants to take public money for private schools and leave the poorest out of the loop. Exotic foreigh country? You mean Hawaii!?
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/26/2008 11:46:18 AM
Nope Coach740, Indonesia, where he was adopted by his stepfather and became an Indonesian citizen, at least according to his school records.
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/26/2008 11:45:30 AM
Obama has tried to woo the religious right by doing exactly what you accuse McCAin of doing, taking public money and using it to pay parents to send their kids to private schools -- vouchers.
http://www.nysun.com/national/obama-open-to-private-school-vouchers/71403/
Just one more example of Obama switching his previously stated position to get votes. Rev. Wright was right, Obama will say and do anything to get elected. Wright knew him for 20 years, so maybe we should believe what he says about Obama. -
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/26/2008 11:42:21 AM
McCain and his wife Cindy work for and give money to many charities -- what has Obama done?
McCain and his wife Cindy adopted a child in need -- what has Obama done?
McCain had decried earmarks, while Obama has requested millions for his financial supporters, political cronies, and even his wife's employer.
Yes, I think McCain is more concerned about blue collar workers than Obama is. Getting foreign corporations to build and locate their production facilities here HELPS them, adding tax burdens to companies doing business in the US takes those jobs overseas.
You do the math.
-
-
Posted By: m921 @ 08/26/2008 9:44:00 AM
ssbn777, I commend you on your honesty. What you are concerned about is the perception that Democrats have helped African-americans. As an African-American I always knew that the Reagan Dems were actually just whites who thought the Dems were doing too much for blacks. REpublican policies may not be in your best interest, but you can always know that they will have policies that will continue the discrimination against other people. Remember the balanced budget? Big deal with Reagan, right? But not a big deal when it was realized that the budget problems were not caused by the welfare state (read handouts to Blacks). What policies supported by Republicans help you so much? Lower taxes for the super-rich? No gun control? Health care for only for those who can afford it? College tuition beyond the reach of the average Joe? Yes your comments were right on time, real and honest? I as the working Joe may not do better, but I can always do better than the "Black Man" . . . . Clap, C lap, clap.
-
Posted By: jnakhoul @ 08/26/2008 9:31:43 AM
hahaha i love you blue collar types, all in favor of tax cuts even when they don't reach your pockets. hope the trickling down is working out for you
-
-
Posted By: abadreview @ 08/26/2008 8:58:40 AM
Working Democrats need to wake up and smell the coffee, perhaps even review Michelle Obama's speech from last night. While Barack and Michelle both attended top schools, they worked hard for everything they got, and they both came from blue collar backgrounds. Barack Obama didn't even make exit the middle class until the past few years, and he did so by selling his book, which I feel that maybe more people should read to get a better understanding of his blue collar roots. Who exactly do the blue collar voters feel will represent their interests best, McCain or Obama? I mean, c'mon, there is no question. John McCain will look after the rich, because that is who is supporting his campaign. Barack Obama has worked for the poor in the past, and he has done so because he knows what it's like to struggle. He has stated hundreds of times that he will not only look after blue collar workers and families, but expand the American job market and create new, and better paying jobs for the hardworking middle class. Whether you are below the poverty level or somewhere in the middle class, Barack Obama is the candidate who will best serve your interests. Anyone who questions that needs to do their homework. Barack Obama emcompasses all that America stands for, in that he proves that no matter what your ethnic background, no matter how humble your beginnings, you can achieve greatness through hard work and dedication. Only in America is his story possible, and because he is able to see and acknowledge these truths, he will be able to help other Americans from all backgrounds reach their full potential as well. I call on all blue collar workers to unite behind the candidate of change, who will represent them to the absolute best of his ability. Personally, I found this article to be way out of sync with the opinions of every blue collar voter I know, whom are all voting for Obama. John McCain will not look after American jobs, he will do continue selling out American jobs and businesses all in the name of making a buck, just as his predecessors in the GOP have been doing for years. It's time to take America back from the wealthy and the special interest groups. We can do that by ensuring that Barack Obama becomes the next Prwsident of the United States. Yes We Can!!!
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/26/2008 9:23:05 AM
Sorry, but Barack was raised by his affluent grandparents. His grandmother was a bank vice president. He was never poor or even lower middle class. Instead of going to work and paying his loans back, he went abroad after he graduated, traveling in Indonesia and Pakistan, purportedly using his Indonesian passport.
Not like a lot of Americans, and certainly not what most Americans dream of when they talk about getting college degrees.
And no one asks what charities the Obama's support, what charities they have actually given their hard earned money, not all those tainted campaign contributions. I can tell you from personal experience that working stiffs are among the most charitable people in the country, giving their "widows mites" whenever they can to community food banks and shelters and other local programs, because they see the guy who just got his pink slip because the factory is cutting a shift and think, "There but for the grace of God...."-
Posted By: jnakhoul @ 08/26/2008 9:28:34 AM
ah i love story time, if you want to pass these statements as facts you might wanna include a source
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/26/2008 9:42:25 AM
Which fact(s) do you challenge? The Indonesian passport? I'd be happy to provide links to sources, especially if Obama will cough up his passport so we can see the visa to Pakistan, which won't be on a US passport because US citizens were not granted visas to Pakistan back then.
And please note, I said "purportedly" so if I'm wrong, show me.-
Posted By: jnakhoul @ 08/26/2008 3:40:27 PM
how about the verified pictures provided by fact check.org is that not enough or do you insist on continuing that silly debate
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/27/2008 3:42:35 PM
Once again, I'm not talking about Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate, but his Indonesian citizenship as a result of his adoption by his step-father (documented in school records) and his travel to Indonesia in 1981 when US citizens avoided the area and would have had some difficulty obtaining passports.
-
-
Posted By: raddave @ 08/26/2008 5:19:21 PM
I have not found one piece of evidence that states that U.S. citizens were not granted visas to Pakistan in 1981, except of a few BLOGS. Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1981, since that is 27 years ago, that passport has long since expired
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/27/2008 3:40:22 PM
If you want to know what was going on in Pakistan during that time, check out "
International Politics, Domestic Imperatives, and Identity Mobilization: Sectarianism in Pakistan, 1979-1998" by Vali R. Nasr, published in Comparative Politics, Vol. 32, No. 2 (Jan., 2000), pp. 171-190. -
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/27/2008 3:37:38 PM
When you request a replacement, you get it back, and the passport office keeps copies, so it should be available. It is highly unlikely that the US or Pakistan would have granted a visa for a student to enter what was in fact a war zone.
On April 27, 1978, the Afghan Army, which had been sympathetic to the PDPA cause, overthrew and executed Daoud along with members of his family.[10] Nur Muhammad Taraki, Secretary General of the PDPA, became President of the Revolutionary Council and Prime Minister of the newly established Democratic Republic of Afghanistan.
In February 1979, the Islamic Revolution ousted the US-backed Shah from Afghanistan's neighbor Iran and the United States Ambassador to Afghanistan Adolph Dubs was kidnapped and killed by Islamists despite attempts by the Afghan security forces and Soviet advisers to free him.
he anti-communist rebels also garnered support from the United States. As stated by the former director of the CIA and current Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, in his memoirs From the Shadows, the American intelligence services began to aid the rebel factions in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet deployment. On July 3, 1978, US President Jimmy Carter signed an executive order authorizing the CIA to conduct covert propaganda operations against the communist regime.
Carter advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski stated "According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise." Brzezinski himself played a fundamental role in crafting U.S. policy, which, unbeknownst even to the mujahideen, was part of a larger strategy "to induce a Soviet military intervention." In a 1998 interview with Le Nouvel Observateur, Brzezinski recalled:
"We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would...That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Soviets into the Afghan trap...The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the Soviet Union its Vietnam War." -- Brzezinski
Pakistan was a staging area for that war. Between 1980 and 1985, nine offensives were launched into the strategic Panjshir Valley, but government control of the area did not improve.[34] Heavy fighting also occurred in the provinces neighbouring Pakistan, where cities and government outposts were constantly under siege by the mujahideen..
Interesting that Brzezinski is one of Obama's foreign affairs advisors, the same Brzezinski who organized and armed the mujahideen that became Al Quaida.
-
-
-
-
Posted By: raddave @ 08/26/2008 5:10:24 PM
Obama never claimed his grandparents were poor or lower middle class, he describes them as middle class. Being a V.P. at a bank doesn't necessarily make someone affluent. Obama traveled to indonesia and Pakistan in 1981, he did not graduate until 1983 from college. Obama says in his book "The Audacity of Hope" that he went to Pakistan with a friend from college who was Pakistani.
-
-
-
Posted By: thehappyamerican @ 08/26/2008 6:04:39 PM
Dems better be worried!
The Americans Suck First campaign isn't too attractive, except to some hollywood leftists, news media elitists or professors like Bill Ayers, the domestic terrorist.
American is a great country! And of fine people! Particularly the blue collar worker and his family! We have in the Biden/Obama ticket a most left-wing and liberal parasite ticket.-
Posted By: raddave @ 08/26/2008 6:11:40 PM
Can you not come up with anything other than American sucks first?
-
Posted By: Davole @ 08/27/2008 3:37:29 PM
raddave -
That America Sucks theme seems to be the backbone of the Obama campaign platform!
-
-
Posted By: marksgershenson @ 08/27/2008 2:03:50 AM
And your brilliant point is what?
-
-
Posted By: ALLEAS @ 08/26/2008 11:51:03 PM
TO THE "happy american', I AM A PRESENTLY A VERY UNHAPPY AMERICAN BECAUSE OF THE FAILED POLICIES OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY ON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. THE ONLY INFLUENCE OF THE ELECTION THAT I HAVE IS MY VOTE. THANK GOD I AM SMART ENOUGH TO VOTE FOR SENATOR OBAMA. THAT IS MY ONLY HOPE FOR A SECURE FUTURE FOR MYSELF AS WELL AS MY CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN. AND AT LEAST I AM SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW HOW TO, THANK GOD, SPELL ASPIRIN CORRECTLY!
-
Posted By: Davole @ 08/27/2008 1:59:42 AM
Alleas -
Why must you shout by using Cap Locks - is your opinion that unfounded that you have to resort to shouting in order to convince yourself that your viewpoint is valid?
Specifically, which so-called failed policies of the Republican Party do you oppose and regret ?-
Posted By: ALLEAS @ 08/27/2008 6:32:12 AM
I USE CAPS BECAUSE I AM LEGALLY BLIND
-
Posted By: Davole @ 08/27/2008 3:27:34 PM
ALLEAS -
I accept and respect that explanation. Thanks for providing it.
Now, would you care to answer the question which I previously posed?
-
-
-
-
Posted By: histchem111 @ 08/27/2008 1:35:35 PM
As a Roman Catholic Democrat, I find yet no attempt by Obama to convince me that he shares Catholic moral values. Joe Biden as a sop to Catholics is an insult as there is no such person as a "pro-choice Catholic" and , the idea that economic issues will force Catholic Democrats to swallow Obama's stance on moral issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage is increasingly erroneous - "..for what does it profit a man to gain the world and destroy himself in the process". rlyons.
-
Posted By: adelina @ 08/27/2008 11:57:22 AM
Obama is a freshman senator wo hasn't accomplished anything of significance. He seems to be suffering from the entitlement mentality and therefore attempting to use his color to get a free ride into the White House, even when he is a black man who does'nt have history in the black experience. He is fake. His message of change is nothing but a bunch of words. For those who talked about McCain's age, What about Biden, old washington guard, Change???....If Obama was a white man, we'd be laughing openly at the audacity of someone without the credentials making such an attempt. This country is at this time in history too fragile for a unqualified to run it. I am a democrat that feels that McCain is better fit to be commander in chief.
-
Posted By: careerdaytrader @ 08/27/2008 11:43:56 AM
PART TWO
HEALTH CARE - While I feel for people who do not have insurance it is a NIGHTMARE entitlement program waiting to happen. The federal government can't run ANY program efficiently and WITHIN BUDGET! Giving a new organization control over health care will reduce the QUALITY of the care and they will mess it up and cause it to be even MORE expensive!
It's estimated that small businesses will have to pay $11,000 per year PER EMPLOYEE for Governement health care! If you guys/gals don't think that will CRIPPLE growth and not only reduce new hirings but cause many businesses to go under and mass layoffs to happen you're crazy
EXPERIENCE - John Mc Cain has it, Obama doesn't and thats why he had to pick Biden who never really has accomplished anything either but he has foreign policy experience and is a so called expert on that, I'll just take them at their word on this. So does John Mc Cain. Obama has no experience. He's a lawyer, taught law at Chicago but was NOT a Professor. He was a senior lecturer. Not that this matters as we all KNOW in our hearts that Lawyers don't CREATE jobs, they just create problems that smarter people than them have to fix before business gets done.
Let's not even get into the fact that Obama was born to a muslim and raised muslim till he was 10. He may or may not be a Christian, many people think he did that for policical purposes but I'll concede that point. One thing I find it hard to ignore is he says he has JUDGEMENT yet went to a church that preaches hatred towards white people and America. Let's not even get into that.
SO LET THE DEBATE of the ISSUES that matter START.
I've called many Democrats on here idiots, morons, pot heads, lazy, worthless, uneducated, etc. I'll stop my berating you WHEN you start talking about the issues that we ALL care about and explain WHY Obama will be a better pick than Mc Cain!
-
Posted By: Jill from Florida @ 08/26/2008 3:44:01 PM
A vote for the CFR backed candidate Barack Obama is a vote for joining Canada, United States of America and Mexico into one nation, one government - the North American Union. Remember only a month ago the word "GLOBALIZATION" came out of Obama's mouth every other sentence. And, his "presidential" seal is 'OBAMA FOR AMERICA". That was no Freudian slip, that was intentional.
The next step (or the first) will be the American Union, which would include Central American and South American countries - David Rockefeller has been fervently been setting up various sub-country alliances for the past several years. Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski are getting old and wish to see this in their lifetime. (For those of you who have set up offshore accounts and companies, that will become the property of the new government. They thank you for your generous donation.)
If you wish to keep the United States Of America a sovereign nation, vote for John McCain. He has guaranteed that the North American Union and the Superfreedom Highway will NOT TAKE PLACE UNDER HIS WATCH. And, for that reason HE IS THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS.-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/27/2008 9:45:25 AM
Hey Jill, what do you think about Kay Orr as a VP candidate?
-
Posted By: metzlerd @ 08/26/2008 4:15:36 PM
How can you support John McCain?
You don't even know what he stands for!
McCain supports NAFTA as is with no renegotiation.
He also supports the North American Union.
If you're going to sing his praises at least get the talking points down! You're supposed to say, "Free trade is good for America. I know some people lost there jobs because of it, but were going to give rich people tax breaks and maybe they'll hire some Americans, even though they're already getting rich from cheap labor overseas."
It won't make a lot of sense, but at least you'll be consistent with McCain.-
Posted By: Jill from Florida @ 08/26/2008 4:40:05 PM
Actually 3 weeks ago, at one of his town hall meetings in Ohio, John McCain was asked by a Lou Dobbs viewer what his stand was on the North American and the Superfreedom Highway. Rather than either completely ignoring her or pretending he didn't know what she was talking about (as does Bush and others), he answered her. His exact words were vehemently spoken, "NOT ON MY WATCH. THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN ON MY WATCH."
He is not for manufacturing leaving the country. He has stated he is for new forms of manufacturing and new sources of employment - including renewable energy - wind and nuclear.
Under the Boxer Substitute amendment (S Amdt 4825 to S 3036) which was supported by Obama, we would give funding for research in wind, solar, electric batteries, etc. The technology would THEN BE GIVEN to other countries. Again instead of manufacturing, our country would remain clean offices for service industry only.
What did you think Obama meant by the GLOBALIZATION he so highly praises? He is so arrogant that he forgets to lie about it.-
Posted By: raddave @ 08/26/2008 6:43:42 PM
He is not for manufacturing leaving the country? He has voted for every free trade agreement and this is what he said about manufacturing jobs in america. ???I???ve got to give you some straight talk???I can???t turn that around,??? McCain said. ???I can???t look you in the eye and tell you I believe those jobs are coming back.???
-
Posted By: raddave @ 08/26/2008 6:29:26 PM
Yeah, McCain does like to give those blustery answers like "I will follow Osama Bin Laden to the gates of hell." But he won't go into Pakistan to get him.
-
-
-
Posted By: raddave @ 08/26/2008 6:02:29 PM
The North American Union is a conspiracy theory that has been debunked many times.
-
Posted By: raddave @ 08/26/2008 6:04:54 PM
And it is McCain that is in favor of NAFTA and CAFTA. Deals that would obviously lead to the North American Union.
-
-
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/27/2008 9:22:44 AM
Not surprising working stiffs don't trust Obama. It's not just guns and Bibles. Here's an Obama Tale for you. In a campaign influenced by Walmart, instead of backing the pro-labor candidate, Obama backed a "Walmart tool."
There was little surprising about Obama's endorsement given his self-interested allegiances to the politically powerful City Hall regime of Chicago's Mayor Daley, with whom Obama shares the same big money campaign super-consultant (David Axlerod) and numerous big money sponsors.
For the first time Mayor Daley had vetoed an ordinance by his normally obedient City Council, and he did not want the council to bring the measure up again. It was originally passed by the council under pressure from a remarkable grassroots campaign, and would have required giant retail corporations like Wal-Mart, Target, Lowes, and Home Depot to pay workers a modest minimum wage of ten dollars an hour by 2010.
Wal-Mart and Target announced that they were putting a number of "big box" retail developments on hold in Chicago, and launched a preemptive public relations strike, threatening to disinvest in the city unless a "favorable business climate" was restored. Daley made a special point of wrapping his veto in the flag of racial justice, claiming it was required to permit the flowering of economic development in the city's abandoned ghetto neighborhoods.
Pat Dowell, the recipient of significant support from the Service Employees' International Union (SEIU), was running against Tillman, and Dowell had strongly criticized Tillman for siding with Daley and Wal-Mart.
Obama needed the support of the powerful campaign finance magnet Daley, and endorsed Tillman, over labor-backed Dowell.
Obama's wife Michelle then received $51,200 in 2006 for attending a few board meetings of TreeHouse Foods, a giant firm that relied heavily on its close business relationship with Wal-Mart. The granting of high-pay/do-little board posts to the spouses of politicians is a longstanding tool of the "old," corporate-dominated politics that Senator Obama claims to reject.
Mrs. Obama resigned from her position with TreeHouse in the summer of 2007, citing "increased demands on her time" in connection with her husband's presidential campaign.
-
Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 08/27/2008 9:19:20 AM
Davole, you are wrong. Women are paid less than men for the same work all the time. It is cost effective as most will not complain and the remedies afforded in court do not raise the cost to a point that makes it a bad business decision for the company.
There is a law on the books which already requires equal pay for women, it just isn't working because the juries and judges who decide these cases still think women are worth less than men. It isn't enough to merely be equally qualified to receive the same pay for the same job, women must be better qualified, not only to receive the same pay, but often to get the job in the first place.
-
Posted By: wildlifeusa @ 08/25/2008 11:50:34 PM
Sorry if the truth hurts, but yes, this country is full of people clinging to their guns and religions. It will be the demise of this country if people's mentalities do not change. This is the 21st century, not the 18th or 19th! Cling to sciences, math, commun sense! China is becoming the first world power, with europe not far behind. As a european, I am chocked at what I see in this country. In many ways, this is like a 3rd world country!! Not the greatest, believe me!
-
Posted By: loriw @ 08/26/2008 1:12:57 AM
If you think Europe is so wonderful and better than the USA....Please, please go back.
-
Posted By: wildlifeusa @ 08/26/2008 2:23:05 AM
Yes, I am going back, in a month.. I have had enought of this country full of idiots like you!!
-
Posted By: Davole @ 08/27/2008 3:07:38 AM
wildlifeusa -
Try to leave earlier - bon voyage!
-
-
-
Posted By: sharenews @ 08/26/2008 2:30:42 AM
Sounds like you need to buy a one-way ticket fast if you are that miserable in the U.S.-
Posted By: wildlifeusa @ 08/26/2008 2:43:40 AM
Yes, one way ticket... as far away as I can be from the imbecility of so many, the ignorance, arrogance, and the most violente society on earth. Sorry, but voting for Bush didn't bring you the best reputation! exept for my friends liberals, I won't have anything good to say about the rest of you.
-
Posted By: sharenews @ 08/26/2008 3:05:50 AM
Im Independent. Ive never voted for a Republican President. At least not yet.
-
-
-
-
Posted By: sparky716 @ 08/26/2008 12:57:41 PM
jill....you know what assume means don't you....just because you ASS U ME something is true does not mean its true....I am a 62 year old blue collar worker (electrician) and I am voting for Obama...I like for my president to be smarter than me ....we have had a stupid one for 8 years ...we dont need a president so out of touch with most Americans that he does not know how many houses he owns or what kind of car he has...seems the only thing he can remember was he was a pow....so were a lot of other good Americans
-
Posted By: Davole @ 08/27/2008 2:36:08 AM
sparky716 -
You may have touched way too many live wires in your career!
Don't worry - both candidates should be smarter than you.
-
-
Posted By: tiredoflies @ 08/26/2008 1:15:42 PM
Once Hillary makes her speech and releases her delegates things will change,
Give it a month or so and watch what happens.
The fact is Obama is near his floor in the polls and McCain in near his ceiling.
Obama has Hillary voters and blue collars to gain and McCain has them to lose.-
Posted By: Davole @ 08/27/2008 2:29:03 AM
tiredoflies -
Obama will continue his downward spiral as more voters get to really know him!
-
Report Abuse
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
- Black Friday should unleash pent-up demand. Analyst Bill DreherNYT
- The task is to restore our conservative bona fides James Bopp Jr. on a 10-pt GOP checklist NYT
- Twenty five years feels right in my bones and right in my spirit. Oprah on ending her showCST
- It’s going to be a holy war Orrin Hatch on debate over the Senate health billNYT
- The nation and the world will see him for the coward he is Holder, on trying KSMAP
Discuss