There's no way to keep Obama's lack of military service out of the campaign.

Maybe it was a strategy of good cop-bad cop. But I'm so sick of Obama throwing principled positions and people who have supported him - and those of us who have not - under the bus that his statement about this makes me sick.

Check out Munguza's 11:55 comment for an example of what a good candidate would have said.

Posted at July 1, 2008 1:09 AM in response to Clark Stands By Comments About McCain

Obama's whole campaign was based on his honesty, principle-driven character, transparency, ethical core, etc. But the moment he throws that behavior under the bus, his voters support him being dishonest, cynically political, and a betrayer of his principles "because that is the only way to get elected."

But that's simply not true. And that belief is the precise definition of "old politics."

There is talking the talk, and then there is walking the walk. The first is regularly spouted everywhere by the con artists. Only the true leaders do the second. Obama simply has not walked the walk. Whatever his motivation in seeking the presidency, it is not what he has said.

We are to be the change we want to see in the world. This action has shown us what the change is in the worl that Obama wants to see.

And that is very disturbing. He has thrown his entire campaign, essentially, under the bus.

No respect for that at all. If he shows himself to have the courage to stand on principle - very unlikely now - I'll cast my vote for him.

It's up in the air at this point.

Posted at June 23, 2008 1:28 AM in response to Why Obama's Support For FISA Cave-In Is Such A Downer

She has not confirmed that she is on this "team," and indeed refused to comment on the way out of the building after Obama's speech.

Posted at June 11, 2008 12:48 AM in response to Obama Says He's Partnering With Elizabeth Edwards On Health Care

Edwards has said nothing to confirm this. Obama's campaign told ABC that no formal talks on this had occurred. In other words, no conversations about it at all.

Clearly, Edwards had no idea this was going to be asserted. Thus no confirmation - or any comment - from her her or her husband.

Obama has the arrogance and ruthlessness to do something like this, and leave the Edwardses to figure out how to deal with it. They would be between a rock and a hard place, John just having endorsed Obama and ready to lose whatever he'd negotiated with Obama unless Elizabeth went forward with it.

I think Obama is a scary dude. Odd that he brings this up after the nomination, just like his several faith-based deals that, if stated before the nomination would have lost it for him.

Scary indeed.

Posted at June 11, 2008 12:45 AM in response to Obama Says He's Partnering With Elizabeth Edwards On Health Care

History will tell whether the win was valid or whether the DNC made sure the Superdelegates gave the essentially tied election to Obama. Even the best scenario of the popular ote put him ahead by 0.4% (i.e., four-tenths of one percent)Not exactly a landslide and surely not a mandate.

Remember how we felt about Bush claiming a mandate - and he "won" by four percent - that would be, what,ten times the margin Obama had - even counting everything the way Obama wanted it counted....

So Bush had many times the mandate Obama has. Why does he and why do his supporters think the other half of the Dem electorate is trash to be trashed? it's not like it's 20%, you know, it's like fifty percent. Obama needs these voters....

Contnuing to insult them desn't help Obama's cause. And there are other alternatives.

Try being ciil to the other half of your party.

Posted at June 10, 2008 8:40 PM in response to Florida Dem Declines To Endorse Obama

Clinton is measurably more progressive than Obama based not only on her policies, which she invites us to hold her to if she were the nominee, but also on her Senate votes.

More objective sites than National Journal show there are 39 Senators more liberal than Obama, who was absent or "present" for many of the more critical, more progressive votes, and Clinton was 25 to his 40 in rank. Another ranking shows him in the low 20s and her as 18th.

She has more bona fides as a labor supporter than Obama. I believe Edwards supported Obama after getting some kind of promise from him, knowing Obama will be the nominee.

The nearly half of us Dems who support Clinton are not senile, ignorant, uneducated, post-sexual, as so many portray us. We will mostly work for Obama, but we do fear his instincts to be a plain centrist, i.e., caving to the Repubs. He will need
to be held to his promises and no one could be more effective at that than a strong Clinton as Senator.

Remember, you do need us working stiffs and old bags to get Obama in there; he needs us and Clinton to keep him honest once in office.

Posted at May 24, 2008 1:50 PM in response to What If Hillary Clinton Returns to the Senate as Labor's Voice?

Fat chance to Mus-Hussein-Grove. No way 25% of Clinton supporters think Obama's a muslim.

I bet 75% of Obama supporters think Clinton actually embodies all that bashing she gets.

Posted at April 14, 2008 7:25 PM in response to How Many of You Dislike/Despise/Loathe Clinton More Than McCain

Fat chance.

Posted at April 14, 2008 7:22 PM in response to How Many of You Dislike/Despise/Loathe Clinton More Than McCain

I am disappointed in Clinton for keeping Penn around and a number of her missteps and, yes, lies. I have been very disappointed in Bill.

I'm disappointed in Obama for his passive- aggressive attacks on Clinton that make it look like she's the attacker. It's rather subtle, I suppose, but to me it's extremely obvious. I think he has been able to portray her in the worst terms via these underhanded psychological attacks that usually look like mild-mannered statements.

So I have no illusions that Obama is "above the fray." The real liberals who have stood for principle have been Kucinich, Edwards and maybe Dodd. Both Clinton and Obama are corporatist politicians, period. Both of them have tons of money from Wall Street, and he has tons from ADM, a huge global corporation that is backing biofuels that are worse for the environment than gasoline.

But I will support whomever is the nominee because nothing would be worse than another 4-8 years of warmongering Republicans.

Clinton or Obama supporters who won't vote or won't vote for the Dem candidate regardless are handing the next eight years to the Republicans. Some may not think it could get worse than it is, but they are wrong.

Posted at April 14, 2008 7:21 PM in response to How Many of You Dislike/Despise/Loathe Clinton More Than McCain

Oh yeah, and good try, Greg. Guess they can't get past their irrational rage, which, as you can see by various comment here, often is not based on facts.

Posted at April 14, 2008 6:58 PM in response to Obama supporters respect Sen Clinton