Quantcast
 
 
 
Top Story
Group Lobbies for Reform of Funeral Industry
My Journey to the Top
 
 
Latest News
Busch nips Edwards to win under caution at Daytona
 
 
expand
REPORT FROM THE FRONT

‘What She Can’t Do Is Have It Both Ways’

In an interview with NEWSWEEK, Barack Obama says the Democratic front runner is 'disingenuous.'

By Howard Fineman and Richard Wolffe | NEWSWEEK
Nov 12, 2007 Issue

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: moblou @ 03/24/2008 4:07:23 PM

    Comment:
    What's happening to the uniter? What's happened to the positive campaign? What's happened to no more politics as usual? In a few words what happened are, Rezco, Wright, terrorist sympathizers, and one small bit of scrutiny by MSM. That's right select Obama for more of the same McCain in 08. Hillary on the other hand will restore our standing in America and abroad. Wake up Americans especially in the states and Puerto left to vote. Answer the call and let's make history with Hillary. Real men and women can vote for a woman. It really will be ok. My question, per an analogy made by my business partner, to the MSM is why does every bad comment made about Obama slide off of him like teflon (clean it up and on to the next) and they stick to Hillary like velcro (can't ever get past them)? Hillary is right for America and there simply is not fair treatment of her in any of the media. I do however think all of this will help to bring it on to the rest of "US" Thank you for listening. KY

  • Posted By: KiEfEr @ 01/30/2008 10:33:23 AM

    Comment: I dont even know why all these people are calling you an idiot for the banana thing so i just wanted to say i hope you win cause i would rather have a colored man than a woman as president any day!!!!

  • Posted By: dchappy@hotmail.com @ 12/03/2007 6:55:46 AM

    Comment: HI! YOU ARE A RETARDED LADDON'T UNDERSTAND"THE BANNANA THING" IT IS SHOVE IN YOUE ASS DAMNED IF YOU HAVE DIFFICULTIE THEN SHOVE IT YOU FATER OBAMA'S ASS HLOE OK LAD.

  • Posted By: dchappy@hotmail.com @ 12/03/2007 6:51:17 AM

    Comment: COMMENT: RE: DACON,
    Well lad, i will not call you idiot because i know you are from the incest clan. this clan do not even recognize their mothers and sisters in dark when they go for sexual action and you seem to be the son of your brother through your own blood sister. no! no! why spell the nameinstead of "she" OBAMA should suck your MOSAD and AIPAC'S bums and ***.s, now satisfied OH! lad.

  • Posted By: Dacor @ 11/29/2007 12:07:08 PM

    Comment: TO DC HAPPY
    your comment is very constructive and very fine indeed, does he need to spell her name every time he talks about her...
    what about the banana thing..?? you thought it might be useful to anybody...your the bloody idot

  • Posted By: dchappy@hotmail.com @ 11/27/2007 9:13:27 AM

    Comment: what this bloody idiot means by "she can't have both the ways" what does this blighter means by "she". who is this she, hey? has she shoved a full lenght bamboo through his ass hole idiot. can't even clearly take her name, Hey ! can't spell out the name of your mother for fear of haveing spanking on you buttocks you fool. Bloody, fool wants to be the President of USA, thought it to be a banana in monkeys hand. stupid has gone mad blubbering what ever comes in his bloody mouth. Hillary, give him a few tight kicks on his butts so that he at least comes to his senses and learns how to behave in public whith a mother aged Lady. . D C HAPPY

  • Posted By: votenic @ 11/26/2007 12:25:03 PM

    Comment: 2008 Presidential Candidate Weekly Poll

  • Posted By: Charles in Maui @ 11/12/2007 10:35:53 PM

    Comment: ??? It would take a ???willing suspension of disbelief??? to believe that Billary Clinton is not the most scripted, focus group tested, contrived, untruthful, double talking, flim flam candidate running for president. As of today, about a week after the last debate, she has not given a straight answer to the question of whether or not people unlawfully in our country should be given driver???s licenses. I think that she must be auditioning for the cast of the new Broadway play, directed by Mel Brooks. It is a remake of his movie ???Blazing Saddles???. She wants to play the role of Governor, so she can just ???do a little side step and just slip away??? from every question that isn???t from one of her plants that are set up ahead of time. Just remember that Bubba is the man behind the Curtin pulling her strings, just like in the wizard of oz. When Billary wakes up in the morning, she looks in the mirror and says, who can I fool today!


    • Posted By: votenic @ 11/26/2007 12:24:53

      Comment: 2008 Presidential Candidate Weekly Poll

    • Posted By: votenic @ 11/26/2007 12:24:12

      Comment: 2008 Presidential Candidate Weekly Poll

  • Posted By: patriotsofamerica @ 11/09/2007 2:02:22 PM

    Comment: If Hillary takes over the White House, expect more of YOUR rights to be taken away and given to small interest groups. Expect her to impose a broader "nanny state" because as most left-wingers believe, you cannot take care of yourself. They feel that the "nanny state" needs to protect you from yourself.

    When the Clintons were in office, there was a dramatic decrease in spending on the military. That hampered the military's efforts at the beginning of this war we are now fighting. "We shouldn't have entered into this war" many people say. What about the USS Cole? How about the World Trade Center bombing back in the early 90's? Those happened on the Clinton's watch. *They did nothing about it. They could have had Osamma back then but chose not to. If they had done their job maybe we would not be where we are at today.

    * I say "they" because who do you really think were calling allot of the shots in the White House? Bill? I doubt it.
    www.move-off.org

  • Posted By: patriotsofamerica @ 11/09/2007 1:56:24 PM

    Comment: I don't like the fact that Hillary has said that she will take things away from you to give to others. I work hard for what I have. Last time I checked that was communism. I do not trust her.
    www.move-off.org

  • Posted By: hoopes_az @ 11/09/2007 1:21:06 PM

    Comment: We all know she is smart and determined. But what about good judgement and character? I think most people who question Hillary see her determination as a problem more than they do a strength. Is she so determined to win that she and Bill will do ANYTHING to get the post? If she wins she will have my support until she does something to lose it, but I do worry about her.

    • Posted By: votenic @ 11/26/2007 12:25:15

      Comment: 2008 Presidential Candidate Weekly Poll

  • Posted By: HillaryforPresident @ 11/09/2007 1:30:38 AM

    Comment: Hillary will be the next President of the United States of America and she will do a spectacular job. Why? Because she knows of no other way. She's a women of tremendous insight, intelligence, resource and determination. I for one, am so proud of her resiliency and vocus to keep the Presidential fight on the positive side. She's the only candidate doing so. Her counterparts are attempting to tear her down and paint her in a bad light because they fear her for personal reasons. Go get 'em Hillary!

  • Posted By: Neffdogg @ 11/07/2007 4:26:06 PM

    Comment: Hillary either was blind to her husband's affairs or she knowingly covered up his affairs to advance his and her political career. What is the greater sin, ignorance or lying?

  • Posted By: ncsuwolf1977 @ 11/06/2007 3:53:59 PM

    Comment: You HRC operatives are hilarious. When asked during a debate to say something nice about the candidate next to her, she couldn't do it.

    Like Obama said, she is disingenuous. If she is the nominee I will vote for her, begrudgingly. Obama '08!

  • Posted By: DMVL @ 11/06/2007 1:32:40 PM

    Comment: Hillary is "disengenous." She voted for the Iraq War and refuses to admit that it was a mistake (hell, her husband Bill was for it too, but that didn't make voting for the Iraq War right). She can't give a straight answer on her view on illegal immigration. She claims she wants health care reform, but takes money from health insurance companies. As for her papers, if she wanted to, she'd release them. Unless you are saying that the people managing our governmental papers are unorganized and inefficient. Oh, those poor people. Stop making excuses for your candidate and tell her to get a soul.

  • Posted By: Hillary4Pres @ 11/06/2007 12:33:30 PM

    Comment: When Obama levels a claim that Hillary is "disengenous" he can't even back up that claim. His only goal is to malign her reputation. As for presidential papers, from what I've read in books by Savage and Dean, once papers have been labeled confidential and released, folks can't go back to ask officials who oversee the maintenance of said documents to move theirs to the top of the heap when it's convenient. Imagine the chaos this would create for the unfortunate souls responsible for confidential documents. Nothing would get done! Who is disengous now?! these candidates know how things work and for them to make false statements like this to disgrace a candidate is disgraceful in itself. Obama and whom ever levels these claims is irresponsible and cowardice. Hillary is truly the only person qualified for the job of President of the United States. Vote Hillary!!

  • Posted By: fordgwf @ 11/06/2007 12:20:26 AM

    Comment: Dems aren't interested in truth I guess ..

  • Posted By: fordgwf @ 11/06/2007 12:19:51 AM

    Comment: Dems aren't interested in truth I guess ..

  • Posted By: RetCombatVet @ 11/05/2007 10:18:44 PM

    Comment: " So is she being honest?
    I think she was being disingenuous.

    What's the difference between disingenuous and dishonest?
    You'll have to ask her."

    This is precisely what gets him in trouble. You brought it up so carry through.

  • Posted By: RetCombatVet @ 11/05/2007 10:17:08 PM

    Comment: "I think she was being disingenuous."

    Why ask her wjen you brought the subject up?

  • Posted By: Jon_Sparks @ 11/05/2007 9:16:48 PM

    Comment: Most of you complaining about Obama "mudslinging" have no idea what mudslinging is. Comparing Max Cleland to Osama bin Laden, THAT'S mudslinging. Accusing Kerry of self-inflicting his wounds in Vietnam, THAT'S mudslinging. Accusing McCain of fathering a black love child, THAT'S mudslinging. Accusing Hillary Clinton of being a closet ***, THAT'S mudslinging. Accusing Obama of practically being a sleeper agent, THAT???S mudslinging. John Edward???s ???Barber-gate???, and being accused of pimping out his cancer-inflicted wife, THAT???S mudslinging. Criticizing your opponent , whether those criticisms are valid or not, is NOT mudslinging. If Clinton is as thin-skinned as most of the posters here, then God help her in the general election.

  • Posted By: Jon_Sparks @ 11/05/2007 9:15:02 PM

    Comment: Most of you complaining about Obama "mudslinging" have no idea what mudslinging is. Comparing Max Cleland to Osama bin Laden, THAT'S mudslinging. Accusing Kerry of self-inflicting his wounds in Vietnam, THAT'S mudslinging. Accusing McCain of fathering a black love child, THAT'S mudslinging. Accusing Hillary Clinton of being a closet ***, THAT'S mudslinging. Accusing Obama of practically being a sleeper agent, THAT???S mudslinging. John Edward???s ???Barber-gate???, and being accused of pimping out his cancer-inflicted wife, THAT???S mudslinging. Criticizing your opponent , whether those criticisms are valid or not, is NOT mudslinging. If Clinton is as thin-skinned as most of the posters here, then God help her in the general election.

  • Posted By: sarainitaly @ 11/05/2007 5:08:05 PM

    Comment: PART FOUR
    "letting your husband routinely find company outside the marriage..." I don't think anyone wants their husband to cheat. It happens. She has done the christian thing and forgiven him, and fought for her marriage, and raised an exceptional daughter. His cheating is on him, not her. Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe she actually loves him?
    Socialized medicine - ya'll should quit being so afraid of it. I live in Italy, and we have socialized medicine here. And you know what, it is pretty great. My FIL is in the hospital right now, and has been for over a week. You know what this is costing his wife? Nada. Sure, you pay for it in taxes, about 50% in taxes.
    But let???s look at an example - Warren Buffett's secretary pays 30% of her salary in taxes. She makes $60k/yr. The annual premium for an employer health plan covering a family of four averages $11,500 (2005 figure). That is $29,500 out of her salary for taxes and healthcare (not including state tax?) Plus you have to pay co-pays and out of plan costs. That is equal to, if not more than 50% of her salary, what we pay here in taxes for our socialized care.
    With socialized medicine, you do not have to pay health insurance, co-pays, out of plan costs, hospital visits, or doctor visits. If your baby has a health issue when it is born, you are covered. Also, we have private doctors in Italy, so, you have the option to see your own physician for visits, but can still utilize the hospital for x-rays and tests. And trust me, private doctors are rich - there is still money to be made - except for the greedy insurance companies, who automatically deny 75% of claims you pay for!
    So, I ask you, who is suffering? I can understand the governments/lobbies fighting against socialized medicine, but seriously, how can Americans protest? You are feeding into their lies and suffering for it. Keep drinking the kool-aid, as they say.

    • Posted By: hoopes_az @ 11/06/2007 12:07:44

      Comment: While informed, I think your comments miss the entire point of this article. WHY won't the Clinton's release the papers? What are they afraid of? How can they attack the current administration's polcy of secrecy and yet do virutally the exact same thing? And, worst of all, WHY do they lie about it, insisting that it is the current administration that is somehow to blame for them not releasing this information.

      We can blame Bush and crew for plenty of problems, but not releasing the Clinton papers certainly isn't one of them. I honestly don't think releasing the papers will cause her problems. However, I think it is a HUGE problem for her not to release the papers, and particularly be dishonest about why they aren't being released.

      • Posted By: sarainitaly @ 11/06/2007 18:42:35

        Comment: PART TWO:
        Daily Kos/NPR: "While it's true that the Bush administration has made the National Archives' process for releasing Presidential records more cumbersome and time-consuming, it's also true that Bill Clinton has asked the Archives not to release personal correspondence between himself and his wife." (I am sorry, but I am on their side regarding not releasing personal correspondence.) "In fact, the National Archives is ready to release 26,000 pages of Bill Clinton's records. But it's waiting for the green light from Clinton's lawyer, Bruce Lindsey, who has not finished his review of the papers."
        "Jay Carson, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, tells CNN that, so far, President Clinton has not challenged the release of any documents, and "no records have been withheld from release by Bill Clinton."
        The Politico said today: "The Clinton library is readying a trove of detail about Hillary's 8 years...for release in late January, government lawyers said in a court filing. But Bill Clinton's lawyer will have the final say on whether 10,000 pages of Hillary Clinton's private White House "daily schedules" will be immediately released to the groups who requested her calendar under the FOIA. Even so, the documents appear likely to become public within a month of their release by the archives, as the general election heats up in February."
        So, in response to your comment, "I honestly don't think releasing the papers will cause her problems." Seriously? How can you not? After the way the right wing-nuts went after Bill and Monica, how can you not think they will do anything in their power to find the tiniest bit of something to hang Hillary? John Kerry's chances were ruined because the right smeared him with the swift boat stuff, and all it took for Dean was a weird yelling fit. All the general public needs to hear is some stupid itty bitty thing to make them completely fickly and run the other way. I think Hillary has every right to be scared. (Not sure if she is, but I would be!)

      • Posted By: sarainitaly @ 11/06/2007 18:42:04

        Comment: PART ONE:
        This 4 part reply you are referring to was a follow up to comments someone left me, after my initial post. WRT the Clintons not releasing all her files, well, I can think of one reason - swift boat. If I were them, I would be going over ever single 78 million pages to make sure there was nothing that could be turned into a sift boat attack. And we all know there should be some doozies in there. From what I understand, they have released over 1 million pages so far, and he is not required to release any until 2012. I saw this: http://tinyurl.com/254m62

        I can't also help but think that the GOP (left as well) WANT these records released so they can once again drudge up all of the crap that happened during the Clinton administration - the stuff we already know, but perhaps has drifted from peoples??? minds. I certainly wouldn't want all the docs surrounding the Lewinsky/White Water scandals resurfacing. There are 20 million email messages archived. Can you imagine what some of those say, between Hillary and Bill, and their lawyers?

        From cnn: "The Clinton library has about 300 outstanding FOIA requests for Clinton documents, totaling 10 million pages, and has six archivists to handle them. Each request requires thousands of pages to look through to see if they're responsive." Cooper said. "Those that are may be classified and may deal with personal privacy, so we're up against an enormous task." According to Newsweek, the Clintons asked in a 2002 letter that "confidential communications involving legal issues and advice" and "communications directly between the president and the first lady" be withheld. Sounds fair to me...

    • Posted By: guera805 @ 11/06/2007 09:05:20

      Comment: sara, I have been cared for under socialized medicine ( in Norway) and had no issues. But then again, I am a generally healthy person. If there are no negatives for socialized medicine then why do so many Canadians come across the border to the U.S. to receive care? And why is there such a long waiting list for many Canadians just to get the care they need?

      • Posted By: sarainitaly @ 11/06/2007 17:25:50

        Comment: The Canadian system is not true socialized medicine, and still uses health insurance to cover about 30% of what is not covered. The Canadian health care system is often compared to the U.S. system. The U.S. system spends the most in the world per capita, and is ranked 37th in the world, by the World Health Organization; when in fact many sources rate the Health Care Systems in France, and in Italy as the top two in the world. Canada's Health System was ranked 30th, using certain specific criteria. They have doctor shortages, but most long waits are for non-emergency procedures. The Canadian system is not the role model for a plan I would implement in the US. And, being from Seattle, I knew many people who headed to Vancouver for medical treatment because it was cheaper. And, I don't think you can have a huge system such as nationalized health care and have NO problems, however, I do feel like the American people are being scammed by big business about socialized medicine. YOu are in a sense already paying as many taxes as countries do that have socialized medicine, but you are not getting the benefits. I urge you to learn more about it, look at France and Italy. Read about Canada's system here if you want more answers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada

  • Posted By: sarainitaly @ 11/05/2007 5:07:43 PM

    Comment: PART THREE
    "The tape proves the Clinton administration was aggressively tracking al-Qaida a year before 9/11. But that also raises one enormous question: If the U.S. government had bin Laden and the camps in its sights in real time, why was no action taken against them?
    Bob Kerry, a former senator and current 9/11 commission member, said, ???The most important thing the Clinton administration could have done would have been for the president, either himself or by going to Congress, asking for a congressional declaration to declare war on al-Qaida, a military-political organization that had declared war on us.???
    In reality, getting bin Laden would have been extraordinarily difficult. He was a moving target deep inside Afghanistan. Most military operations would have been high-risk. What???s more, Clinton was weakened by scandal, and there was no political consensus for bold action, especially with an election weeks away."
    The Republicans launched a massive attack on Bill Clinton, dragging him through all the crap regarding Monica Lewinsky, as a distraction, so Bin Laden could get away! So, once Bush stole the election, they could launch their plan of a war with the middle east. All they needed was their event like *pearl harbor* with our *#1 enemy Osama*, and they were in business. They got what they needed, Osama is still free, and Bush and his cronies are rich, rich, rich!
    Bush and Bush 42 led us into Iraq. Nice try though.

  • Posted By: sarainitaly @ 11/05/2007 5:06:20 PM

    Comment: PART TWO
    Rwanda - Rwanda was a tragedy, one that Clinton personally apologized for. "With the failure in Somalia still very much in the minds of American policymakers, neither the United States nor the United Nations moved aggressively to stop the slaughter."

    Kosovo - In 1999, Clinton moved with NATO to begin a massive bombing campaign against the Serbian government to end its "ethnic cleansing" of Albanians in the Kosovo region. Specially trained forces from the Serb Interior Ministry, along with paramilitary forces that had been active in Bosnia years before, had created hundreds of thousands of refugees through the application of this policy; Serb forces also murdered thousands of ethnic Albanians. But the bombing worked and, with the help of Russian diplomacy, forced the Serbian government to withdraw from the region. With no American battle casualties during the fighting, U.S. troops joined British, French, and other NATO forces to occupy Kosovo as peacekeepers under an agreement worked out with Yugoslavia. The province remained nominally part of Yugoslavia, but the Kosovars had gained autonomy, and the possibility of eventual independence. Clinton's forceful stand in Bosnia and Kosovo enhanced his foreign policy resume.

    Disbarred - For 5 years. Clinton agreed to the Arkansas fine and suspension Jan. 19, the day before he left office, as part of an understanding with Independent Counsel Robert Ray to end the Monica Lewinsky investigation. The agreement also satisfied the legal effort by the Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct to disbar Clinton for giving misleading testimony in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case. Who wouldn't cop a plea to avoid a sex scandal? Ask any republican, and they will agree.

    Clinton pardoned 3 more during his presidency then Reagan. He received 2000 petitions. Mark Rich's pardon was supported by Scooter Libby, so there probably was something fishy about it. HAHA Clinton was never convicted of wrong doing. The presidential pardon is the right of the president. He did what he did. As for Hill's brother, who wouldn't pardon their family? He served his full term in jail, and it was for a cocaine charge. As for him taking money to get his friends pardons, maybe he needed the money for drugs? haha anyway he gave the money back, and they are not responsible if he was lying to them. Every family has their black sheep, no?

    Failure to capture Bin Laden - Oh my god! You just made me realize what happened!?! Clinton's failure to capture Bin Laden was because he was mired in scandal! (Am I a little slow on this one?)

    Clinton had been on the hunt for Bin Laden, they were tracking him, and had satellite images of him. So, if the Clinton administration was so close to finding Osama, and were actively seeking him, why did Rice and the Bush administration treat Osama like a non-threat, before 9/11, and in their comments after 9/11??

  • Posted By: sarainitaly @ 11/05/2007 5:00:12 PM

    Comment: Reply to Hitch and Don_1111 - It is long, so I have to break it up in three parts.

    PART ONE:
    Somalia - you mean when the troops were sent in by Bush 42? That Somalia disaster? The failure of American troops to be properly equipped for the mission, which led to the resignation of Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, was in part responsible for the failure there. An operation that was being managed not only by UN headquarters in New York but also by dozens of contributing governments.

    Bush 42 was warned:
    "There is little reason to believe that the bitter and long-standing clan rivalries that have turned Somalia into a particularly murderous African Lebanon will yield to outside intervention???. Tragic as the situation is in Somalia ??? the dissolution of the Somali nation-state does not affect vital USG security interests. Accordingly, USG should think???and think again???before allowing itself to become bogged down in a quagmire without the promise of offsetting concomitant benefits."

    In December 1992, in one of his last acts as President, George Bush proposed to the U.N. that United States combat troops lead the intervention force. The U.N. accepted this offer and 25,000 U.S. troops were deployed to Somalia. President Bush stated that this would not be an ???open-ended commitment.??? The objective of Operation Restore Hope was to rapidly secure the trade routes in Somalia so that food could get to the people. President Bush stated that U.S. troops would be home in time for Bill Clinton???s inauguration in January.

    Once President Clinton was inaugurated he stated his desire to scale down the U.S. presence in Somalia, and to let the U.N. forces take over. In March 1993 the U.N. officially took over the operation, naming this mission UNOSOM ??? II. The objective of this mission was to promote ???nation building??? within Somalia. One main target was to disarm the Somali people. UNOSOM ??? II stressed restoring law and order, improving the infrastructure, and assisting the people with setting up a representative government.

    President Clinton supported the U.N. mandate and ordered the number of U.S. troops in Somalia reduced, to be replaced by U.N. troops. By June 1993, only 1200 U.S. troops remained in Somalia. However, tragically, 18 soldiers died in Somalia the Battle of Mogadishu.

    Perhaps committing troops to a country in the middle of clan warfare, when advisors reported that it was too risky, in the final month of office was not the smartest move by Bush 42. Blame all you want, but this was not a Clinton failure.

  • Posted By: Yeah_Right @ 11/05/2007 4:44:32 PM

    Comment: Hillary can have it both ways Barack! You're losing and so is Edwards. How's that for an honest approach.

  • Posted By: kalla56 @ 11/05/2007 4:44:00 PM

    Comment: I am a 60 yr.old woman, wildly liberal, am a feminist, etc. No way will I support Hillary! She is totally disingenuous. I don't know any woman with my views who supports Hillary. We need someone who is honest and answers questions in a straightforward manner. I love Bill, but we need a new, non-dynastic face in the White House. Either Obama or Edwards would be a great candidate.

    • Posted By: mellieblu @ 11/06/2007 10:12:33

      Comment: New and non-dynastic does not necessarily equal competent. Look at Jimmy Carter. He was an abysmal president. His heart was, no doubt, in the right place; look at all he's done post-presidency! But given that recent historical lesson, how could we say for sure Edwards or Obama will be any more effective?

      I am a liberal and a feminist. I support Hillary. Edwards, as far as I've been able to tell has no policy direction of his own, except to try to punch holes in those of his opponents'. Obama has been standing on his "track record" of voting against the war in Iraq. If I'm not mistaken, he was not Senator Obama at that time. How could he dance that dance if he wasn't even invited to the party?? I know he has held strongly to the opinion that he wouldn't have voted for the war. He was not privy to the information those who were senators at the time were privy to, nor to the pressures of that time. Given he was not there, he has no leg to stand on with this argument. It's a moot point.

      Another of Obama's key points is "NOT politics as usual". His plan was to go out and sell himself, and not just criticize the other candidates. I loved that about his candidacy. HMMM, but now, time is getting shorter and shorter and seems as though he's going on the attack!! Shock beyond SHOCK. He is a politician after all. How disappointing.

  • Posted By: arizona49 @ 11/05/2007 4:24:31 PM

    Comment: I will be very happy when people begin to realize that this campaign should not be about what Bill Clinton did while he was in office. If so, then maybe Bill should run. Is he the one truly running? I find it quite ironic that Bill and Hillary have dismissed the contributions of his cabinet members and the brillance, talent and intellect he surrounded himself with during his administration, including but not limited to one of the best sec of state, Ron Brown and Al Gore, his vice president. These folks didn't ride in on the Clinton Arkansas wagon. Furthermore, have you obama bashers thought to look at the economic climate in Arkansas during Clinton's administration as governor. Compare that to the decline in our climate during his administration and his failure to take the threats of the taliban serious. Some of the major problems we are having today are a result of Bill and I presume Hillary's pillow talking.

  • Posted By: PatrynXX @ 11/05/2007 4:02:22 PM

    Comment: Well hillary isn't Bill. Bill was a great president. But I'm tired of batting the same old baseball back and forth. We've had Bush's and Clinton's in the White House for the past 27 years, not sure if making that to 30 plus years will be great for the country. That and I don't entirely see much difference in direction between Hillary and George Bush.

    • Posted By: Rome0608 @ 11/05/2007 22:59:39

      Comment: What an irresponsible comment!!! There is no difference?

      • Posted By: hoopes_az @ 11/06/2007 12:01:34

        Comment: What about that comment is irresponsible?

  • Posted By: montecucco @ 11/05/2007 3:55:56 PM

    Comment: Perhaps once in a lifetime (and perhaps not that often) the American public has the opportunity to elect a president as brilliant, honest, and genuine as Barack Obama. Someone with the natural abilities and knowledge to succeed on a grand scale, who cares more about the country and its people than the power, influence and money that comes with the job (or in Hilary???s case, a designation in the history books as the first U.S. woman president). We Americans continually do things that are shockingly stupid - like reelecting George Bush even though he had proven his incompetence over the prior 3 years. For the future of the nation and the world, can't afford to get it wrong this time.

  • Posted By: montecucco @ 11/05/2007 3:52:17 PM

    Comment: Perhaps once in a lifetime (and perhaps not that often) the American public has the opportunity to elect a president as brilliant, honest, and genuine as Barack Obama. Someone with the natural abilities and knowledge to succeed on a grand scale, who cares more about the country and its people than the power, influence and money that comes with the job (or in Hilary???s case, a designation in the history books as the first U.S. woman president). We Americans continually do things that are shockingly stupid - like reelecting George Bush even though he had proven his incompetence over the prior 3 years. For the future of the nation and the world, can't afford to get it wrong this time.

  • Posted By: OldPhatPhart @ 11/05/2007 3:45:53 PM

    Comment: Everyone seems to think the a presidential candidate is supposed to be omniscient and omnipresent. They don't need to know everything; that is why they have advisors and Secretaries of Defense, et cetera. They only have to make a final decision based on what advise they have received. A candidate only needs a path and a plan. How they achieve success is through their advisors, et al.

    As for those who believe Barack Obama is where he is at today is because of the Clintons, someone really needs to go back a little further in history. Clintons had nothing to do with putting Barack or anyone else where he is today. I think Robert Kennedy had a lot more to do with helping minorities achieve positions they are able to attain today.

    No matter who you like. VOTE. If you don't, nothing you say here means anything.

  • Posted By: SuzPas76 @ 11/05/2007 3:29:40 PM

    Comment: Let's clear something up. Hillary is riding on the coat tails of her husband and skirting the issues. The US isn't that stupid and we are ready for a real change. Obama is the next president.

  • Posted By: SuzPas76 @ 11/05/2007 3:25:34 PM

    Comment: Regardless of his banter here or elsewhere - Obama is our next president. You might want to watch what you say here and keep that in mind. As far as Hilary goes; are you serious? She can't stand firm on any decision she makes and is riding on her husbands coat tails. She shouldn't make president just because she is Bill Clintons wife. It will never happen - The US is smarter than that.

    • Posted By: mellieblu @ 11/06/2007 10:19:14

      Comment: Oh my! Watch what I say here and keep that in mind?? What are you doing? Why would you make a threatening comment like that on a Newsweek board? And what is that supposed to mean. Who's going to do what to me if I don't watch what I say here???

    • Posted By: RICKYR @ 11/05/2007 16:55:25

      Comment: AND YOU ACTUALLY WANT TO VOTE FOR SOMEONE WHO WONT PUT HIS HAND OVER HIS HEART FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGENCE,CAN SOMEONE SAY POTENTIAL THREAT....DUH

  • Posted By: Rdfr @ 11/05/2007 3:22:18 PM

    Comment: Obana has no clue which direction to go. Hillary and Bill made Obama he should never forget that Clinton made him!!! Had it not been for Clinton Obama would just be an unknown now he has the nerve to attack the Clinton's the way he does. If Obama was smart he would have pushed his stupid ego aside ran vice to Hillary and after the next 8 years he would have gotten the experience to be President. If Obama gets to be President of USA he would be the most smart ass, spoiled leader we have had. As a Black American Male i would never vote for him-not now!

  • Posted By: harrells @ 11/05/2007 3:21:08 PM

    Comment: Clinton committed a felony during her 2000 campaign for senator by helping to organize a celebrity concert that included Cher and others that raised over $1,000,000. This is illegal. There are taped conversations of her discussing this effort. It's on YouTube and other places. Check it out. She isn't fit to be president of the United States. She's also a Neo Conservative and support the New World Order.

  • Posted By: harrells @ 11/05/2007 3:18:20 PM

    Comment:

  • Posted By: Yeah_Right @ 11/05/2007 3:15:31 PM

    Comment: It's one thing for Brack to weave his own vision of audacious hope and spoon feed it to his flock. It's quite another to point a finger at another candidate and say she's disingenuous. She at least hasn't referred to him as a "friend" like he recently referred to her for quite some time. No, she knows the definition of honesty and it's not Barack.

  • Posted By: Rdfr @ 11/05/2007 3:12:59 PM

    Comment: How can Obama say things like this about the Clinton's if it werer not from the Clinton's putting his silly ass up he would be nothing but an unknown voice! This is from a Black American!!! How stupid! The man should know je is not ready for President and could have run as vice then gotten in the seat but nope his head is to far in the sky!

  • Posted By: Rome0608 @ 11/05/2007 3:05:52 PM

    Comment: If Hillary wants to Win the general election, she should completely disregard and ignore the TV pundits beginning with Fineman, Mathews, Russert and all the other Newspaper commentator on why she ???would lose??? the south. She should not raise one eyebrow for the South. She shout not spend one single penny to win hearts from the South. She should completely forget about the South.. Those people won???t ever change. They are so extremists in their political views that ANYBODY that is not a R, is a liar and will burn in hell anyway. What she SHOULD do is campaign heavily in all north eastern and western states, win all the extra states Gore and Kerry won PLUS one more. Ohio. That???s it. She will be the next president of the United States.
    My advice to Hillary.. Target OHIO and forget about Florida. Floridians are a crazy bunch anyway. They can???t even come to terms with their own state problems, and I am a Floridian.

  • Posted By: Yeah_Right @ 11/05/2007 3:05:44 PM

    Comment: A few days ago, Brack called Hillary "a friend". Now, he says she's disingenuous. Nice friend and not a very honest one either - since he's trouble with that definition, too.

  • Posted By: Lawrence Walker @ 11/05/2007 2:27:40 PM

    Comment: I like the way Obama speaks. I do believe he is the more direct and the biggest risk taker of the most popular candidates. I most like to listen to John Edwards, who like Obama, is rather direct and not so calculating as Clinton. Yet Clinton may show that calculated fence-sitting, no matter how resolute she seems in appearance, is the way to win.

  • Posted By: valesj @ 11/05/2007 2:27:37 PM

    Comment: Folks, criticizing your opponent is a natural thing to do in politics. You can't win an election if you praise your rivals, so don't take it so personal. I'm sure they all actually like each other, it's like someone once said a long time ago, nothing personal, just business.

    The real true question is can either one of them win in the general election, I don't think it's a coincidence that the last two democrats that have won the white house have been southern white men. Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter. One can only imagine the attacks on both Clinton and Obama form the republicans. On the one hand we have the whole Monica Lewinsky affair coming back up and on the other hand we have a peron who's name sounds to close to Osama bin laden. So think real carefully folks about who you vote for in the primaries because they may not cut it in the general election.

  • Posted By: rasmuss1 @ 11/05/2007 2:24:57 PM

    Comment: Since Sen. Obama employed the term "disingenuous", it should be up to him to define the term as he intended to apply it.. It would not be up to Hilary Clinton to define what he meant to say! If he means to say that she is dishonest, he should have the intestinal fortitude to say so. If he really intends to speak in plain terms, he should say what he means!!

  • Posted By: Rauol Duke @ 11/05/2007 2:19:55 PM

    Comment: To Liberal29:

    Prove you are a liberal first, you are nothing more then a Hillary shills. IF you were a liberal you would not be support such a Corporate Candidate. The Clintons treat the liberal like Bush treats the Christian conservatives; give us nothing but lip service.

  • Posted By: pab0228 @ 11/05/2007 2:19:36 PM

    Comment: In response to "the country is not ready for a woman to be president" - I have to totally disagree. I'm part of this country and I'm ready for a woman president.

    • Posted By: Rauol Duke @ 11/05/2007 15:27:32

      Comment: Woman, man or some cross dressing conservative, that is not the issue. The issue is who is right for America at this time. It is definitely not Hillary. She is hostile and controling. I say this from dealing with her. It is her way or no way. We could have had some form of Unversal Health Care in 94 if she could back down. She will not end this war in Iraq and she will expand it to provide for her corporate donors. Really look at her record not what she say it is and you will be running from her faster then a gun man in the mall.

      Look at the Clintons did with their other phony war on drugs. They expanded and funneled more money to corporate donors. Expand private armies. Expand law enforcement. Expanded jails. When they should of expand drug treatment. The average addict get 6 six weeks in patient when the industry says the need a minium of six months. I could go on and on but I have a real job, I am not working for one of the campaigns.

  • Posted By: Nightingeal @ 11/05/2007 2:15:53 PM

    Comment: "We're running for leader of the free world."
    Umm, perhaps you should take a step back Barack Obama. You're running for PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES! This is not going to win you any popularity contests with any of the countries the US deals with.
    And also, weren't you supposed to be trying to keep this election *mudslinging-free"? Is this how you will keep your campaign promises?

    • Posted By: Rauol Duke @ 11/05/2007 14:36:46

      Comment: What is Mud Slinging? Speakig Truth to Power? So are you on Hillary's payroll?

  • Posted By: Nightingeal @ 11/05/2007 2:11:00 PM

    Comment: leader of the free world.???? Hmm, and here I thought it was just a UNITED STATES election!!!!!

  • Posted By: coach77 @ 11/05/2007 1:43:41 PM

    Comment: Why dont everyone just vote dont worry about Hillary she wont win so why waste time on endless talk and banter. This country is not ready for a woman to be president so it won't happen anytime soon.

    • Posted By: pab0228 @ 11/05/2007 14:21:44

      Comment: Hate to totally disagree with your statement but I'm part of this country and I am MORE than ready for a woman president.

  • Posted By: envgj248424 @ 11/05/2007 1:28:37 PM

    Comment: If you are truly a Buddhist who is comfortable in your religion, then I ask you this. Why must you an anyone else who has a problem with Christianity always try to discredit it? Why don't you just live your life in your faith, and the way you chose? No one has put a gun to your head and has asked you to chose a different faith. Just remember this though once you were baptised Catholic you will always be Catholic.

  • Posted By: Rome0608 @ 11/05/2007 1:27:08 PM

    Comment: Hillary is being attacked by the republicans all the time. You just need watch one of their debates to see it.. Instead of them describing in details what they will do as presidents, they spend their entire debate attacking her. Like if she has been the president of this country. I will blame the journalists or debate mediator for not pursuing or pushing the candidates to explain to the American people what their stands are on important issues that affects us all. So, the last thing I need or want is to see one of our own lashing and feeding into the attacks. Leave that to the republicans and to our so called- liberal media journalists or news anchor to do, we should not do it. It doesn???t matter who is leading or losing.. This negativity can come to bite us all in the general election. I like Obama, and I support him, but he most Stop this.

    • Posted By: rapcetera @ 11/05/2007 14:48:19

      Comment: Stop What? He's NOT attacking her, certainly not the way John Edwards is. He's simply pointing out policy differences. The People of Iowa and New Hampshire know this, so why can;t you get it?

  • Posted By: envgj248424 @ 11/05/2007 1:26:40 PM

    Comment: If you are truly a Buddhist who is comfortable in your religion, then I ask you this. Why must you an anyone else who has a problem with Christianity always try to discredit it? Why don't you just live your life in your faith, and the way you chose? No one has put a gun to your head and has asked you to chose a different faith. Just remember this though once you were baptised Catholic you will always be Catholic.

  • Posted By: Rome0608 @ 11/05/2007 1:23:52 PM

    Comment: Hillary is being attacked by the republicans all the time in each of their debates, so the last thing I need or want is to see one of our own lashing and feeding into the attacks. Leave that to the republicans to do, we should not do it. It doesn???t matter who is leading or losing.. This negativity can come to bite us all in the general election. I like Obama, and I support him, but he most Stop this.

  • Posted By: BobD_43 @ 11/05/2007 1:23:16 PM

    Comment: It appears that Obama is using the style in politics as GW, so I expect, and probably so does Hillery, that his next barrage will be about her sexual orientation, or the sanctity of her parents marriage. It is a shame, because he seemed such a nice guy. If he continues on this journey of self-destruction, he will be history.

  • Posted By: Liberal29 @ 11/05/2007 1:23:14 PM

    Comment: Prove it, Senator. Prove any part of the mud you've just slung at Hillary Clinton has a word of truth to it. I'm tired of hearing this kind of accusation pointed at Bill and Hillary without a shred of real proof. I say it is you, sir, who is being dishonest. You can't come up with a straight answer to questions about the specifics of your plans, but you call Clinton a waffler? What nerve. I submit, sir, that you are not ready for prime time. You are no leader and may even be a coward.

    • Posted By: Rauol Duke @ 11/05/2007 14:21:12

      Comment: To Liberal29:

      Prove you are a liberal first, you are nothing more then a Hillary shills. IF you were a liberal you would not be support such a Corporate Candidate. The Clintons treat the liberal like Bush treats the Christian conservatives; give us nothing but lip service.

  • Posted By: Liberal29 @ 11/05/2007 1:22:09 PM

    Comment: Prove it, Senator. Prove any part of the mud you've just slung at Hillary Clinton has a word of truth to it. I'm tired of hearing this kind of accusation pointed at Bill and Hillary without a shred of real proof. I say it is you, sir, who is being dishonest. You can't come up with a straight answer to questions about the specifics of your plans, but you call Clinton a waffler? What nerve. I submit, sir, that you are not ready for prime time. You are no leader and may even be a coward.

  • Posted By: Liberal29 @ 11/05/2007 1:20:19 PM

    Comment: Prove it, Senator. Prove any part of the mud you've just slung at Hillary Clinton has a word of truth to it. I'm tired of hearing this kind of accusation pointed at Bill and Hillary without a shred of real proof. I say it is you, sir, who is being dishonest. You can't come up with a straight answer to questions about the specifics of your plans, but you call Clinton a waffler? What nerve. I submit, sir, that you are not ready for prime time. You are no leader and may even be a coward.

  • Posted By: BobD_43 @ 11/05/2007 1:16:36 PM

    Comment: Well, it appears that Obama has all but given-up, what with calling Hillery a liar, he is taking on the tactics of GW. Does desparation bring out ones true character?

  • Posted By: otiskopis @ 11/05/2007 12:49:13 PM

    Comment: am sorry but u said u are African and u support HRC i bet she bribed u huh? c'mon what has HRC done, Obama reformed illinois death penalty, campaign reform ETHICS illinois and federally, reformed racial profiling in illinois, what has HRC done, come out of the closet, am african tooo apart from JFK there is no any other person who has ever thought of coming with any effective change than obama proposes. TRUTH HURTS

  • Posted By: MichaelChima @ 11/05/2007 11:59:13 AM

    Comment: I am an African who is committed to the Support Hillary Clinton for President Campaign, therefore I cannot agree with the personal views of Senator Barack Obama on Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.

    Barack Obama knows he is losing ground to Hillary Clinton and he is getting nervous and now using his wits to discredit her. He is afraid of losing to Clinton since his racial appeals to African-Americans have not impressed them so far, because they would rather vote for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton than vote for an African-American man who cannot convince the electorate on relevant issues of governance and has chosen to be petty in his unreasonable remarks on the personality of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.
    .

    • Posted By: rapcetera @ 11/05/2007 14:52:13

      Comment: Mr Chima, how now? U talk say u wan vote for Hillary, u sure say na d tin wey you wan do be that?

      Dude, check out Obama's platform and his Pro-African policies. He's the only one talking about HIV/AIDS in Africa, the only one talking about extending serious AID to Africa, WAKE UP and smell the roses man, Hillary does Africa no favors. Look at the Way Bill Clinton (and I love him) ignored Rwanda during the genocide. Wake up!

      Obama 08!

    • Posted By: rapcetera @ 11/05/2007 14:19:41

      Comment: Are u sure you're African?

  • Posted By: qwerty1972 @ 11/05/2007 11:14:13 AM

    Comment: kgmasta, get your facts straight! you should be ashamed of spreading all this baseless nonesense!
    So, how are you related to the Hillary campaign!!? How much are you getting paid to air all these lies?

  • Posted By: qwerty1972 @ 11/05/2007 11:11:42 AM

    Comment: kgmasata, get your facts straight. So, how are you related to Hillary's campaign?

    • Posted By: kgmasta @ 11/05/2007 11:23:15

      Comment: I would not vote for Hillary if you paid me, what part is false. Do not spew about the hand over heart thing either because who cares. He is Muslim, you cannot dispute that. He was also educated in Jakarta where the practice radical Mulsim ideas. What part is false?

      • Posted By: indystacey @ 11/05/2007 12:46:56

        Comment: First, there is nothing wrong with being a Muslim. But Barack isn't Muslim. It's a smear campaign. Another Swiftboat attack. Funny how holier-than-thou Christians have no problem spreading lies when it suits their purpose.

  • Posted By: jamesbordonaro @ 11/05/2007 11:08:44 AM

    Comment: Hillary Clinton is the wrong choice for the Democratic Party at this time. She is too polarizing a figure for Republicans to embrace. I believe the reason for that is that Bill's sex scandal put her in a no win situation. Perhaps she should have left him at the time. But there may have been personal reasons not to, i.e., she really loves Bill and wanted to protect her marriage and family. However, because she doesn't fit the traditional role of first lady as demure, she comes across as politically calculating and by not leaving Bill it appeared that she was just bidding her time until she could run for President. As unfair as that may be that is the perception for Republicans. The country needs to be reunited in a common purpose on some many issues. GWB had his chance after 9-11 and blew it big time. I think the country is more polarized than at any time since the 2000 Supreme Court ruling on the election vis a vis Florida. What I hear here in Kansas is that most people like Obama but don't think he's been in government long enough. He will undoubtedly be in the best position to become the next Dem. candidate regardless of what happens in Nov. For example, Hillary wins in Nov. but will have a difficult race in 2012. If she doesn't win then Obama will become establishment candidate as well as the outsider. It will spell the end of the DLC era. If she does win in 2012 then he will probably become a strong contender in 2016 as I don't believe the Dem. party will want to nominate Hillary's veep candidate (it would simply be too much of a good thing). If a Rep. beats Hillary in Nov. then the Clintons' and DLC are finished for good although she will stay in the Senate, and Barack becomes the face of the opposition party. All bets are off if Edwards becomes the nominee and especially if he wins (which would be likely) I don't see him belonging to either camp unless he was to chose Obama as his running mate.

  • Posted By: Jim Hofbauer @ 11/05/2007 11:04:36 AM

    Comment: AND THIS FROM A MAN WHO WILL NOT RECITE THE PLEDGE OR PUT HIS HAND OVER HIS HEART WHEN OTHERS DO??????? NOT A COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF THAT I WANT. GET REAL

    • Posted By: rapcetera @ 11/05/2007 12:53:40

      Comment: pssst hey Jimmy boy...

      why don't you conduct some research before spouting your mouth off with some bullshit. That fake story about Obama has been debunked by the Washington Post. You don't believe me? Here: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2007/11/obama_nabbed_by_the_patriotic.html

      next time watch your mouth and conduct research before spreading fake rumors about other people

  • Posted By: Mo sez @ 11/05/2007 10:59:53 AM

    Comment: I LOVE IT! Every two years an election takes place of some sort and everyone gets sidetracked from their normal daily lives of American Survivor. Does everyone out there really make decisions based on whatever sound bite best fits their paradigm? You can give me any candidates name and I'll bet you $1,000 that I can find at least 20 pro or con arguments for why you should or should not vote for that person. Right now my only hope is that the person that wins either reduces the gas prices to the levels before Bush was elected, or support the technology so that our vehicles and home heating are able to run on water.

  • Posted By: Mo sez @ 11/05/2007 10:57:42 AM

    Comment: i LOVE IT! Every two years an election takes place of some sort and everyone gets sidetracked from their normal daily lives of American Survivor. Does everyone out there really make decisions based on whatever sound bite best fits their paradigm? You can give me any candidates name and I'll bet you $1,000 that I can find at least 20 pro or con arguments for why you should or should not vote for that person. Right now my only hope is that the person that wins either reduces the gas prices to the levels before Bush was elected, or support the technology so that our vehicles and home heating are able to run on water.

  • Posted By: Jim Hofbauer @ 11/05/2007 10:56:55 AM

    Comment: THEY ARE GANGING UP ON HER BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN . IT FELT LIKE SHE WAS BEING BOMBARDED FROM ALL SIDES LAST WEEK AND THAT WASNT FAIR. NEXT THEY SHOULD ALL ATTACK OBAMA, AND THEN EDWARDS. LETS JUST TAKE TURNS BY ATTACKING EACH CANDIDATE AND THEY WILL BE ON THE DEFENSIVE TOO, LOVE TO HEAR THEIR ANSWERS !

    • Posted By: indystacey @ 11/05/2007 12:43:47

      Comment: They weren't "gaining up on her". This isn't grade school. She is the front runner and the logical target. Grow up.

  • Posted By: scottyi @ 11/05/2007 10:54:57 AM

    Comment: kgmasta...you are lying. Nice try. To debunk this, go to:
    http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp

    • Posted By: kgmasta @ 11/05/2007 11:26:27

      Comment: All reverse spin, nice try, he is a wolf in sheeps clothing, remember where you heard it, he is burying or distorting the truth about his past to gain entry into the golden gates of the white house

  • Posted By: macmillanthurman @ 11/05/2007 10:54:12 AM

    Comment: I believe that those horrified by "negative comments" are being disingenuous. This includes the posters here. They are clearly Clinton advocates. The real reason why Clinton can avoid negative comments is because she is far in the lead. Candidate Bush was the same way. When he had a substantial lead in the polls, he was all happiness. When he was challenged by McCain after New Hampshire, the knives came out. Clinton, with an experienced political team, is merely using conventional wisdom. Under such logic by those who are horrified by "negative comments", they would have supported Candidate Bush for his positive campaigning in good times (i.e., being up int the polls).

  • Posted By: terry schaefer @ 11/05/2007 10:45:15 AM

    Comment: The longer the campaign, the longer the length of Hillary's nose. Fortunately, we have one year to analyze the true character of each candidate. Please ask each candidate to clarify their top ten objectives for the first 100 days in office and how those objectives would be funded.

  • Posted By: kiske @ 11/05/2007 10:40:58 AM

    Comment: DWARD, (the three time looser), Obama, the desperate and manipulated by the media, should feel shame on themselves, I kind of like Obama, but now, he show me how far he willing to go for a position, he denigrated himself by attacking so personal another person. I now considering Hillary, she showed me that she has personality and character by standing up to all those attacks without loosing control and her credibility. Shame on Obama and Edward and the rest of the candidates, except Richardson who was a real person there. I don???t mean to attack your opponent, but no in personal and so hated way like most of the candidate did. What are they going to say when Republican start attacking Hillary in the general election? Think what they are doing and saying now, because they will have to stand up for Hillary later on as a democrat if they are really democrats.credibility. shaem on Obama and Edward and the rest of the candidates, except Richardson who was a real person there. Idont mean to attack your oponent, but no in personal and so hated way like most of the candidate did. what are they going to say when Republican start attacking HIllary in the general election? think what tehy are doing and saying now, because they will have to stand up for Hillary later on as a democrat if they are really democrats.

    • Posted By: theEman @ 11/05/2007 11:11:25

      Comment: Where does it say in the Constitution that a President has to be Christian? An American Muslim might be exactly what we need to calm the mess in the Mideast created by the Shrub adminstration. Hillary is not much more than "Bush lite."

  • Posted By: terry schaefer @ 11/05/2007 10:37:21 AM

    Comment: The longer the campaign, the longer Hillary's nose. Fortunately, we have a year to expose the true character of all candidates.

  • Posted By: kgmasta @ 11/05/2007 10:37:18 AM

    Comment: Who is Barack Obama? Who is being disingenuous?????
    Probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a Black Muslim from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHIEST from Wichita, Kansas. Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii. When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia. When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocated to Indonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school. Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, "He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic school." Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education. Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta. Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who're now waging Jihad against the western world. Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking Major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy. The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!!!! ALSO , keep in mind that when he was sworn into office - he DID NOT use
    the Holy Bible, but instead the Koran (Their equivalency to our Bible, but very different beliefs) .
    Would you want this man leading our country?......NOT ME!!! IF you are going to be in our great country, live by OUR rules. Why even let him be sworn in WITHOUT the Holy Bible?? That should tell us ALL something right there!!!!!!

    • Posted By: no0ne_007 @ 11/05/2007 11:43:58

      Comment: As someone who spent twelve years at Saint Mary's Catholic school, only to become Buddhist, I ask you a couple of questions. If you need to accept Jesus as your savoir to get into heaven, then what about the Jews (a.k.a Hebrews). They don't believe Jesus is the son of God, does this mean they will burn in hell? But according to the Christian Bible, they are the chosen people?... Adam and Eve had two sons, who did they mate with if Adam and Eve were the first people on earth? I could spend all day pointing out the loose ends and hypocrisy of the Christian faith..

  • Posted By: kgmasta @ 11/05/2007 10:31:11 AM

    Comment: Who is Barack Obama? Who is being disingenuous?????
    Probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a Black Muslim from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHIEST from Wichita, Kansas. Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii. When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia. When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocated to Indonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school. Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, "He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic school." Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education. Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta. Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who're now waging Jihad against the western world. Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking Major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy. The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!!!! ALSO , keep in mind that when he was sworn into office - he DID NOT use
    the Holy Bible, but instead the Koran (Their equivalency to our Bible, but very different beliefs) .
    Would you want this man leading our country?......NOT ME!!! IF you are going to be in our great country, live by OUR rules. Why even let him be sworn in WITHOUT the Holy Bible?? That should tell us ALL something right there!!!!!!