I signed up specifically to say - I agree with you. That's where I see a huge difference. If Obama weren't in this, I don't know if we would have seen her true character.

Hillary and Geraldine have exposed their smarmy souls.

Billy, your "who's sorry now?" comment is unfortunate (unless you were actually being sympathetic; I can't tell sarcasm from a hole in the ground on this site).

We're all sorry now, aren't we.

I voted for Mondale because I hated Reagan, and because I knew America wasn't ready for a woman anywhere near the west wing I knew they'd lose, though I thought the attempt was symbolic.

Beyond being brilliant enough to instantly grasp what's going on and make a decision based both on principles and political reality (and oh by the way having been already briefed two weeks before when brilliant advisors saw a problem might be brewing), a president's integrity and honesty are about all I care about.

I heard a few minutes of Clinton on NPR this morning and was full of wonder at the Bushiness (or Shrubbery) of it. Obama may be boring with all his math teacher talk, but if folks aren't starting to notice that she's weaseling around the party rules and trying to steal votes, they're dumber than I thought. Maybe she thinks we're all so used to twisted talk from the White House that we won't notice.

I don't know what kind of "character" she has, but I do know her actions are getting smarmier by the day. And we haven't even begun to hear what the Republican attack machine has in store for her. You just know someone's rubbing their hands with glee and sifting through rooms and rooms of scandalous stuff on her.

Good post, lo fi.

Clinton's red phone ad seems to suggest that if the US suffers an attack she would instantly launch nukes against Iran or some other Muslims somewhere. Then if it turns out later that the attack was from a domestic source, I guess she'd force the courts to declare the attacker a Muslim foreign combatant because in fourth grade he did a report about the Middle East.

A few months ago I considered Obama and Hillary reasonably decent candidates and would have voted for either of them in November. Now I am so disgusted with Hillary, I will stay home on Election Day if she is the nominee.

I am a 60-yearr-old white woman but I do not support Hillary for two main reasons. First I think Obama has clearly shown the ability not play politics as usual. He graciously deflected the Geraldine Ferarros attack. I believe he is the right man at the right time who is offering us all a chance to get our of the morass we are in and I I'm willing to take the chance he offers. For all long time I thought I would vote for Hillary. When she was ahead she was funny and gracious. When she lost Super Tuesday her true character came out and it was ugly. Realizing she could not longer win on the merit against Obama she let her own Rove, Mark Penn, loose. Attacks soon followed with Hillary doing the more subtle ones like answering the question about Obama being a Muslin with "of course not . . . . as far as I know. Smarmy. The only way she can win this nomination is to bloody Obama and steal the nomination.
Any person who can look the audience in the eye and say she deserves all the delegates in MI even if Obama's name was not on the ballot and then berate Obama for not breaking the rules by leaving his name on is no better than any Republican argument used in the 2000 election. She will not win the national but even if she does it will be deja vu fighting over and over again.

Tally up the benefits the American people have received since 1992. Bill had a booming economy to help him balance the budget and to add jobs by the thousands. His list of successes beyond that are modest because he was waging war 24-7 with the Republicans. We then got Republicans for 7+ terrifying years.
Bring back Hillary and Bill--and yes, Bill will not stay out of the limelight--and we will be at war once again in Congress. Yes Hillary is a fighter; she is not a leader. We need a new game board with new players.

This 60 year old MaMa is for Obama !

NO DRAMA OBAMA!!!!

Hillary herself now regrets voting for the Iraq war. But people like her because she's "tough", meaning that she doens't think once before going to a costly war, be it with a foreign country with no plans or means to hurt the US, or with a fellow Democrat. Go to war first, ask questions later. Yeah, that's just what we need... And by the way, that's not what tough people do, that's what cowardly people do.

Read her f'ing speech, you idiots.

She didn't "blindly follow" Bush anywhere, nor did she blindly ignore Hussein as Obama did.

And Obama was safely tucked away in his little community with his "Audacity of Hope" preacher giving post-9/11 sermons on how we bombed others so what did we expect? Yeah, must have been real brave for Obama to be anti-war in that neighborhood.

Despite some of the vitriol and anger here, I wanted to point out the profile on Barack Obama's mother in today's New York Times. There's so much fury, conspiratorial spin and divisiveness going on right now, it was a bit cathartic to read this article to kind of refocus on what's right about Senator Obama by getting to the heart of who he is rather than the angry vision of what others want him to be. It's worth a read.

Here's the link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/14/us/politics/14obama.html?ref=politics

Here are some passages:

"As a mother, Ms. Soetoro was both idealistic and exacting. Friends describe her as variously informal and intense, humorous and hardheaded. She preached to her young son the importance of honesty, straight talk, independent judgment. When he balked at her early-morning home schooling, she retorted, “This is no picnic for me either, buster.”

“She had a world view, even as a young girl. It was embracing the different, rather than that ethnocentric thing of shunning the different. That was where her mind took her.”

"Her first topic of conversation was always her son, her female friends said. As for him, he was grappling with questions of racial identity, alienation and belonging."

“She gave us a very broad understanding of the world,” her daughter said. “She hated bigotry. She was very determined to be remembered for a life of service and thought that service was really the true measure of a life.” Many of her friends see her legacy in Mr. Obama — in his self-assurance and drive, his boundary bridging, even his apparent comfort with strong women. Some say she changed them, too."

.“I think she was not at all personally ambitious, I think she cared about the core issues, and I think she was not afraid to speak truth to power.”

*** AnnH Excellent comment on character

*** Elizabeth2 you too. I love your anecdote.

Character is high on my list: number one. Character defines a person. Gaining confidence as a trustworthy and forthcoming individual is measured by deed not word alone.

Demeanour is an indicator of how a person might cope with stressful situations, address complex situations and make difficult decisions. No amount of experience actually prepares a person for emergency situations. Someone whose temperament is consistently even-keel is more likely to contemplate the situation and then respond to a crisis and/or while under intense pressure. It is reflection of character.

Experience is a false narrative. Every crisis is different. maintaining reasoned logic and rational thinking has nothing to do with years of experience. Unintended consequences are the direct results from errors in judgment regardless of experience. Years of experience do not translate into wise decision-making. i.e. Cheney, Rummy, etc..

After twenty debates people have a sense of how Obama acts under pressure. Time and again he has been consistently responsive, not reactive, to adversity. Snide remarks are met with patience, intelligence peppered with a sense of humour more often than not.

Obama's temperament has been tested. His ability, based on what I've observed, to accurately judge situations and make sound, moral decisions are measures of Obama's strength of character based on words followed with deed.

The Reverend Wright...Obama's spiritual leader. That's wonderful.

I'm lovin it! Obama, even if he somehow wins the DEM nomination is toast. Play the tape over and over and over forever. His 20 year association with the Reverend Wright is the TRUE Obama. The phony transcend race argument is gone and Obama will never be President of the US. God Bless America and talk radio, this is not going away however much the leftist media such as KOS, ObamaPost, MSNBC/NBC try otherwise. Also, there will be no more MSNBC debates so Obama will actually have to answer tough questions not the suck-up kiss up questions from the leftist socialist worthless MSNBC/NBC.

Drudge now FINALLY has it up (as does Hannity, Ingram, Savage, O'Riley, etc.) Way to go Sean Hannity and I don't even like you. The truth will set you free, Jesus was a black man taken care of by those nasty white European Italian Romans. Sure. :)

Geraldine Ferarro is 100% correct!!! Go Gerry, tell those kool-aid drinkers the truth.

That's Putting a Fine Point on It

Speaking of character -- I have watched many of Sen. Obama's speeches -- I can practically repeat what he is going to say after the first few words.

The NYTIMES article in today's issue mentioned his referring to his mother as a "single mon" -- when I first heard him, he was referring to being raised by a "single, teenage mom" -- that later changed to a "single mother and his grandparents"

From what I can read about his background -- technically, ne never had a "single, teenage mom" -- according to the story, his mother married when she was 18 and, from what I have read earlier, bore the son at age 19. The father left when he was 2.

A few years later, she married again. He has a half-sister.

He wasn't raised by a "single, teenage mom."
Maybe she was a single, teenage mother for a month or so depending upon when the parents divorced.

Now -- for him to say that he was raised by a "single, teenage mom" paints a much more interesting picture of his past.

Some could argue that there is nothing wrong with white lies or embellishment.

I don't agree.

However, he also doesn't tell the truth about larger issues either.

See the NYTIMES story of Feb. 3rd about Sen. Obama's ties to the nuclear power industry (Exelon) in Illinois. Read about the bill he introduced to force public notification when toxic leaks take place at a facility. When his nuclear power friends in Illinois didn't like his bill, he watered it down. The bill has never been passed in Congress. HOWEVER -- during the Iowa campaign, Sen. Obama said that he gotten this legislation passed. He never responded to the NYTIMES as to why he had said it passed.

Now, campaigns are stressful, but I find it difficult to believe that he can't remember whether a bill he introduced had been passed or not -- considering his short time in the Senate.

I also have noted several instances where he has an excuse for something questioned -- example, saying he pushed the wrong button on some of those "present" votes in Illinois. Now if that had been true, wouldn't he have corrected the error?

The Rezco Association is another example -- he called the house deal a "bone-headed" mistake -- that was a 15 or 16 year association with all sorts of red flags -- when it was first brought up in a debate, he tried to sound like he didn't even know Rezco -- did five hours of legal work for the individual.

Why would a person of high character have a 15 or 16 year association with Rezco? All of the problems were known when the house/lot deal took place.

In an earlier campaign, he said in a campaign questionnaire that he didn't believe in individual ownership of handguns (something on that order) Recently, he said that was a mistake by an aide, that he didn't mean that...

The communication with Canadians about NAFTA is another example of not telling the truth.

Some will say that all politicians lie, etc. I have been following politics for over 40 years and I do not believe that all politicians are liars, etc. I believe there are many honorable people in political life.

From what I have read thus far, I do not have that impression of Sen. Obama though.

I have two quick points...

The best one who took calls at 3 a.m. was LBJ. I miss LBJ. I keep imagining how he would have been obsessed about the Gulf coast during and after Katrina, about twisting (and breaking arms, if need be) when it came to rebuilding.

But, let's face it: The scariest calls come in DURING the day. Or the ones that carry a lot of weight that seemingly don't - like the mortgage meltdown. Did anyone see the tent city in California on BBC America last night? About 40 percent of the "residents" there are there thanks to the mortgage meltdown. I bet those folks won't be the last. And I bet their plight wasn't called in by a frantic aide at any time of the day or night.

I say, Screw the 3 a.m. call. Let's see how hard you'll do the LBJ Arm Twist for the common good.

Lalo ...you are treating the red phone as if its just the regular phone. Let's remember that thsi is a special phoen that when it rings no matter what time it is you know that something serious is happening.

If my regular phone rings at 3am my response id what the f**k. In the position of someone with this kind o fresponsibility, if my RED phone rings at 3am I know its quite serious (like answering a call to 911) and I shake off the sleep and listen careful.

THIS WHERE JUDGEMENT COMES BEFORE ACTION!!