Obama's Creative Clippings

I agree that I wish his ads didn't partially clip the quotes this way. However, I would take a look at www.factcheck.org itself for a more complete picture in terms of overall reliability of the candidate's statements and assertions. I would agree that no politician is as pure as the driven snow, but inspecting the debate truthfulness reports, advertising and other reports on the site have Obama with quite a bit fewer misstatements and distortions than Ms. Clinton.

Obama's plan guarantees coverage for everyone that wants it. Hillary's plans forces you to have what the government says. Stop attacking Obama's plan for giving Americans choice. Choice will ensure health care companies don't abuse the system.

Hillary Clinton's plan would just force people to get insurance like we do with car insurance. There is no government paid insurance with Hillary's plan, the money comes out of people's pockets.
Obama not so brave on the war huh. Yea, and he talks good, so thousands of people line up for blocks to hear someone talk good.

In my opinion, not everyone may want insurance and that is why I think Obama has a better plan. He plans to lower costs to make it affordable and accessable to all, but not mandate that everyone must have it regardless of whether they want it or not. Most will, those that don't still have the freedom to decline. "Universal' means "wide in scope; generally applicable; widely adaptable or effective in different directions". Obama is not misleading on this statement at all.

Please understand that Hillary/Obama are actually following Edwards' lead. He came out with a health care plan (mandated), a plan to leave Iraq, and an economic plan before anyone else. His hands are clean; he has not taken contributions from PACs or lobbyists. He is not in corporate America's pocket. That is why he is getting virtually no coverage from the media. He is the guy who scares the Republicans, not HIllary/Obama - both of whom are HEAVILY indebted to lobbyists and corporations. Now, think for a minute, who do you believe is capable of bringing change - the guy who leads or the ones who say "me, too"? I have been thinking about this campaign for awhile, and i have concluded that Edwards is the only progressive with a real chance of winning the general election. The Republicans will eat Obama for breakfast and they aren't particularly bothered by Hillary. They can smear her, too. Furthermore, they can live with either of them because they are not advocating REAL change. Edwards know their games and is willing and able to confront them. Please, folks, stop the emotional engagement with all the media packaging of Hillary/Obama as the battle-of-the-sexes, like it was a tennis match. THINK! Obama HOPES for change while upholding the status quo and taking money from corporations; Edwards PLANS for change. Who can really take us there?

I WOULD NOT GIVE BILL CLINTON A CHANCE BACK IN THE WHITEHOUSE.HE CUT OFF MY DAUGHTERS SSI IN 1998,SHE HAS HAD 3 VALVE REPLACEMENTS AND HE ***** HER OVER FROM GETTING SSI SHE IS 21 YEARS OLD AND FACES MORE SURGERIES HILLARY WILL DO THE SAME WITH HEALTH CARE AND THE LOWER TO MIDDLE CLASS PEOPLE..I WOULD RATHER SEE BUSH LOL THAN A CLINTON

BILL CLINTON TOOK MY DAUGHTERS SSI AWAY IN 1998 THE HECK WITH CLINTONS SHE HAS HAD 4 OPEN HEART SURGERIES AND IN 98 SHE HAD IT TAKEN AWAY..I WOULD VOTE FOR ANYONE BUT THE CLINTONS

I have to agree with Charles. Obama has continually made it clear that his health plan will make health care affordable for everyone but will not mandate coverage from the government. His plan will allow competition to continue between health insurance companies, helping to lower costs instead of allowing doctors and pharmaceutical companies to set the prices as high as they can get away with when there is no free market.

The post by auntB2008 is a copy of an e-mail message that has been promulgated by right-wing, small-minded, likely racist, hate mongers. It contains some elements of truth (e.g., his father was a Kenyan and his mother was from Kansas) but it also contains bald-faced lies that have been discredited by a number of reputable and independent sources (e.g., http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/238/ ). Newsweek should moderate these posts and remove content that is simply untrue. Intelligent discussion among individuals that differ in opinion is great and should be encouraged, but Newsweek should not aid and abet slander by providing a forum in which long discredited garbage can be rehashed in an attempt to scare the small-minded away from the most intelligent and promising presidential candidate we???ve had in years.

Hillary Clinton takes credit for the Bill Clinton Administration???s
accomplishments when touting her experience advantage over
her rival Obama.

OK, lets list the important ones that had long lasting affects:

N.A.F.T.A. and the W.T.O. - Clinton championed these
disastrous trade deals that have destroyed our middle class
and sent our good paying blue collar jobs away.


Ballistic Missile Technology to China. ??? Clinton reversed the
ban the State Department had imposed on the transfer of this
dangerous technology, signing a waiver to allow just one
company to do it. The Lorel Corporation. Coincidentally that
company is run by CEO Bernard Swartz who had been the
biggest contributor to Bill Clintons reelection campaign.

I won???t mention any of the ridiculous scandals that also plagued
the last Clinton Administration. The Clintons directly led to the
Republican takeovers of the Presidency and both Houses of
Congress with their shenanigans.

Now we have Hillary Clinton who takes millions of dollars
of campaign contributions from corporate lobbyists saying she
is the candidate of change???

Are we THAT stupid!

Hillary has Terry McAuliffe running her campaign. This is
the sleazy guy who ended up with millions of dollars from the
WorldCom fiasco that left thousands of honest peoples life
savings gone.

Come on people, lets move forward. Not backward!!!

It's not HOW FAR but HOW WELLL things are done. If you like, keep writing about Obama... it only helps people get to know more of the differences between him and Mrs Clinton that you are supporting, and the cxhange Obama will bring to the WH.

I have to agree with Charles. Obama has continually made it clear that his health plan will make health care affordable for everyone but will not mandate coverage from the government. His plan will allow competition to continue between health insurance companies, helping to lower costs instead of allowing doctors and pharmaceutical companies to set the prices as high as they can get away with when there is no free market.

The post by auntB2008 is a copy of an e-mail that starts with some truths and proceeds to promulgate several bald-faced lies that have been researched and shown to be false by a number of independent journalists. The message is clearly the product

Do we really want to take the risk of electing a president that could possibly turn out to be racist? Would McCain or Clinton or any other candidates (dem or rep) even be in the running if they attended a church that only allowed white members? I find this very disturbing. This does not seem to me to be a basis for uniting the American People. I researched the website of the church he attends and, sure enough, not one white, mexican, asian, or any other race was to be seen or spoken of anywhere on the site...strictly African American...Way to unite! And what is the deal with Obama and the American Flag? This country has honored the American Flag for hundreds of years, it's called patriotism.

In similar prose, I could easily write a column on how your column is misleading. You accuse him of being misleading because he has not adopted your language. Sen. Obama has consistently explained that his plan does not include a "mandate" and why it does not (it wouldn't work). His ad is entirely consistent with his proposals and with his explanation of them. Your misleading characterization of him purports to be fact checking when it is an endorsement of the misleading mischaracterization by another candidate. Ironially, that other candidate actually claims to offer universal coverage when a number of "experts," including a former Sec. of Labor, suggest that other candidate's plan would end up covering ^fewer^ people.

In the beginning I thought highly of Obama. However, early in the debates he on occassion reminded of GW Bush with his answers and arrogance. Then he started or let "his staff" start negative ads and comments despite having committed earler to run a clean campaign based on the issues. Obama is not any different than any other politician; and worse than most because he does not really represent change and lacks true values with his mis-leading ads. As a democrat, I am still undecided; but Obama has been as big a disappointment as Climton and Edwards..