I just wanted to point out and put it in writing that Senator Barack Obama is doing quite well in the national and state wide polls, even before the first rally in New Hampshire today with Obama and Hillary on the stage together.

While I'm sure Obama appreciates any help she and Bill can give him, be mindful that he was doing very well before they stepped into the campaign to assist him.

In other words, the Clintons or their supporters can't claim to have 'given' or 'put' Barack Obama over the top - standing by his side in his campaign.  They have a right to claim they 'helped'; but so far, things look like he will win with or without their 'direct' support.

Democrats were coming 'home' before the Clintons came on board.  That's a fact now.

Latest Polls:

MINNESOTA -17
WISCONSIN-13
MICHIGAN-6
COLORADO-5
CALIFORNIA-28
NEW MEXICO-3
PENNSYLVANIA-4
INDIANA-1
OREGON-6
OHIO-5
VIRGINIA-2
FLORIDA-4 (in one poll)
MISSOURI-1 (in one poll)
NEVADA-TIED
IOWA-6
NEW JERSEY-11
NEW YORK-14

Some of you will say I'm worrying over nothing - just so long as he wins.  I disagree, from what I've seen so far, Barack Obama will win this election on his own merit and campaign strategy (even if, God forbid, the Clintons dropped off the face of the earth today).  I want this fact to be part of his legacy.  I refuse to accept that he couldn't have done it without 'them'.

Just to clarify - I'm not saying he can do it without Clinton's supports, just the Clinton's themselves.  I just happen to think Democrats will come home in November with or without them.

I would like to hear your opinions on Senator Barack Obama nominating Representative Robert Wexler from Florida as his Vice President.

Wexler has worked tirelessly for Obama these past few months.  He spoke for him at the DNC when discussing Florida and Michigan voters.

He campaigns with and for Obama constantly.

He's recently written a book call "Fire-Breathing Liberal: How I Learned to Survive (and Thrive) in the Contact Sport of Congress"
 
He's sponsored bills to Impeached the president and vice president.

I'm not sure if any House of Representatives have ever won a presidential or vp race before - anyone know?

Yes he's a liberal and proud of it;  But he is popular in Florida, a state that could help Obama win the election in November.

Opinions?

While I respect and at one point, cared a great deal about President Bill Clinton (I still have two of his pictures hanging in my office), I resent what he and Hillary are doing with respects to Senator Barack Obama and his campaign.

They played ‘chicken’ and it appears they may have won.

Hillary held back enthusiastic actions toward Obama’s campaign and Bill refused to even speak to Obama.  They said to Obama, you ‘come to us’ and ask for help – WE are the leaders of this Party, not YOU.  They want Party members to see Obama ‘come to them’.  Kneeling before them like a great admirer.

It’s like having a fight with a loved one.  One always backs down.  One stands their ground.  Hillary and Bill made sure that Barack Obama was the one backing down.

The Clintons seem to think that Barack Obama owes them an apology for winning the Democratic Party’s primary. 

They don’t like it one bit.  They along with their supporters, think the Obama team cheated in some way.  They feel like they’ve been mistreated and that Obama needs to say he’s sorry and that he ‘owes’ them big time.

May I ask, what about Obama, his team and his supporters?  They too feel like they were stepped on and abused during this campaign.  Why shouldn’t we be demanding Hillary and Bill apologize to us for ‘their’ actions during their campaign? 

Barack Obama, a relatively unknown Senator, along with his team and supporters, were able to manage their campaign in such a way to have outsmarted the two well established, well connected, experienced candidates and their campaign advisors;  Simple fact.
 
Both teams did things they shouldn’t have; but the last thing Barack Obama should be ask to do is ‘beg’ for anything.  He WON!  And just like any other campaign, the winner takes all.  Losers don’t go demanding apologies and money to pay off their debts for having mishandled their financial affairs.

While I would have been just as sadden and angry for awhile, if Hillary had won, in the end, I would have ended up voting for her because I believe 'more' in the Democrat’s principles then any Republican ones.

I would not have ‘used’my vote as a ‘payback’, as some are saying they will now do.  Anyone that does that, are thinking about themselves and not the country as a whole.

It’s just been announced that Barack Obama ended up calling Bill Clinton today.   For that, I am one Democrat that will never trust or respect Bill or Hillary Clinton ever again.  They've gone beyond that wall for me.

Senator Barack Obama is planning on voting for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) bill even though it contains an immunity clause for the telecom companies.

Not too long ago he said he would help to filibuster the bill.

Question.  Senator Dodd and Feingold are planning on filibustering the bill now.  Dodd is a supporter of Obama.

Think maybe this is PLANNED. 

Obama gets it on record for general election that he SUPPORTS the FISA bill (protecting our nation - stops McCain from accusing him of being weak on Terrorism); but Dodd and Feingold fix it so the bill never gets to a vote -- allowing Obama the chance of not actually voting on it (pleasing the Democrats).

Yes I realize that Dodd had previously stated he would filibuster any amnesty FISA bill.

Keep in mind that Dodd is also on the short list for Barack Obama's VP.

Opinions?

I realize Senator Obama has asked his supporters (I'm one of them) to help retire Senator Hillary Clinton's campaign debts, but I'm not so sure I understand why it's our duty to help her do that.

Most candidates when they run out of money, stop campaigning;  Hillary on the other hand insisted on digging herself more into a hole by continuing to campaign.  Why is this bad judgement Obama supporter's responsibility?  Why must we reimburse her for doing something some would say was 'stupid'. 

Most people when their income is less than their liabilities, stop spending money, they don't continue going in to debt hoping their neighbors will pay the bills for them later.

Hillary's insistance on campaigning was bad judgement.  Plain and simple.

Unless of course, the DNC asked her to stay in the race, to cover all 50 States to build up campaign bases in each; then of course, it would be the DNC's responsibility to pay her back.

If that was the case however, voters should be told the truth.  Otherwise, it's extremely rude to ask a person barely surviving on their monthly income (Hillary's working class man/woman) to donate money to an ex-candidate that is already a multi-millionare and will only get richer as time goes on with more book deals. 

One might get the idea that Senator Hillary Clinton is bribing Senator Obama; Pay my bills or I won't help you win in November (I'm not so sure he 'needs' the Clintons; but why should he (we) be forced to pay her bills either way?).

I haven't heard Mitt Romney ask to be reimbursed for his millions he spent campaigning against John McCain, have you?

No Senator Obama, I'm sorry, but I disagree with you on this one.  Give me more of what I need to hear, and maybe I'll change my mind.

The administration lacks an updated and comprehensive Iraq strategy to move beyond the "surge" of combat troops President Bush launched in January 2007 as an 18-month effort to curtail violence and build Iraqi democracy, government investigators said yesterday.

While agreeing with the administration that violence has decreased sharply, a report released yesterday by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) concluded that many other goals Bush outlined a year and a half ago in the "New Way Forward" strategy remain unmet…

It’s kind of laughable that the GAO even bothers investigating a possible Post-‘Surge’ plan.  Who in their right mind thought this administration or the Republican Party for that matter, even ‘cared’ about what happened ‘after’ the surge planned was initiated?  Their ultimate goal was to curb the violence before November 2008 Election Day.  Period!

Yes, even though we were told the ultimate goal was to curb the violence long enough to allow the Iraqi government breathing room to negotiate their political goals; the true reason for the ‘surge’ was to ‘hide’ the truth from the American people about Iraq’s stability long enough to get passed November's election day.  What happens after that is up to the new administration.

How many Americans do you suppose will bother to read the GAO and the Defense Departments assessment of Iraq after the surge took place?  How many will read the part that says, “"security, political and economic trends in Iraq continue to be positive, although they remain fragile, reversible and uneven."?

In other words folks, if we pull the additional 10,000 troops left from the original ‘surge’ of troops starting back in January of 2007, putting us back to the number (132,000) we had back then over there, Iraq may end up going back to the way it was in 2007.  As John McCain predicts, we’ll have to sustain this force indefinitely if we continue with the same strategy he and the Bush administration has taken.

It still remains a fact folks, the Iraqi’s must be told – it’s time you stood up and we stood down, we can no longer hold your hand.

Barack Obama should get video clips and quotes with Bush/Cheney and their campaigns USING the threat of a possible terrorist attack as a means to SCARE voters into voting for them -- he should then add those to the current statement by Charlie Black (John McCain's campaign manager), that McCain would BENEFIT if we were attacked again.

Charlie Black should be FIRED!

He's told the ENEMY that YES INDEED, they CAN influence our politics – all they need do is attack us.

Keep in mind that ENEMY could be ANYBODY - not just al Qaeda or the Taliban.  Think about it folks.  Who would benefit if a ’Bush like’ republican were to win control of the office of the President?

What are McCain’s plans?  He wants to stay in Iraq for however long it takes.  He implies he’s ready to “Ba, Ba, Ba Iran”.  We’ll be in Afghanistan for many years to come too.  Our troops are being depleted and worn out.  We’re spending billions of dollars monthly over there.  Our economy is in deep trouble and the price of gas and heating are hitting the roof.

Who benefits when we are no longer the super power or a very weak one?

What’s to stop one of them from hitting us and making it appear to be a terrorist attack?  I know, I know, you don’t believe in conspiracy theories; but folks, this theory ‘could indeed’ happen.