This is why Obama must win!

I remember seeing a poll last year in which 51% of voters said they would "never, under any circumstances" vote for Hillary Clinton. I can't see what she has done in the meantime to win them over.

Most of the people that "would never vote for Obama," are racists, therefore probably sexist as well, and most likely closely aligned with the Republicans anyway.

As if you hadn't noticed, Barack Obama is deeply inspiring on the campaign trail. While the Clinton campaign has engaged in cannibalistic, slash and burn politics, metaphorically knifing her opponent in the gut at every opportunity, Obama has been recruiting a new generation of voters that have been sickened by the politics of stupid five-second sound bites, and aiming to rework the tired old electoral map originally characterized by Tim Russert as a divide of "red and blue."

Barack is about crafting a new paradigm in order to solve problems, while the Clintons are about achieving power for power's sake, and propping up their own tired, old egos.

Sure, the nineties were "prosperous," but that prosperity was based mostly on the unsustainable "tech bubble," crafted around some wispy notion of an "information-based" economy, and the related "vaporware" of a million ill-defined Silicon Valley startups, and a poorly thought-out concept of "free trade," that mostly meant closing American factories and outsourcing jobs to some third-world hell-hole where near-slave-labor saw to it that widgets came in under cost.

The Clinton years also saw the seeds sown of what we are reaping today. Carnivore and Echelon were the forerunners of where we stand today, where there is no privacy whatsoever in our electronic communications. President Clinton also engaged in the quaintly named practice of "extraordinary rendition." That's the practice of outsourcing torture. Hell, at least, under the Bush administration, torture isn't outsourced -- it's done at home, thus providing jobs to formerly unemployed patriotic American torturers.

If Hillary Clinton is somehow, despite the inevitable math, the nominee, I will vote for her, for the simple fact that I believe she will appoint marginally better judges than McCain. However, in the meantime, I will stand on the principle and promise of the new approach that Barack represents. He represents taking the government away from the corporate interests that see war as a capital investment. Obama represents the idea of providing for the needs of our own citizens, and reaching out to the world to promote peace. He would not cavalierly speak of obliterating a nation of seventy-one million people solely to project an image of "toughness" to voters so brain-dead, that perhaps they shouldn't even be allowed to vote in the first place.

You may claim that I unfairly blame Hillary Clinton for what was so bad about her husband's administration. Perhaps you would have a point. However, if we omit her White House years from the equation, her hyper-inflated claims of experiential superiority over Obama dissolve into the dry dust that they are. So, maybe you want to reject the White House years, but claim her years as Arkansas first lady? Okay, but then she must accept responsibility for the execution of Ricky Ray Rector, the mentally-retarded man that her husband had executed during the 1992 campaign, in an effort to appear "tough enough" to be president. (Notice a pattern here?)

It seems to me that someone in this race is an expert at "political posturing," and it IS NOT Senator Barack Obama.

If some anti-miracle occurs and Ms. Clinton attains the nomination, I will come back into the fold, simply because the McCain alternative would be even worse.

To claim, however, that Senator Clinton is the "pure one," and that Senator Obama is the one that has been engaging in some cynical hunt for votes, is disingenuous, and ultimately harmful to the Democratic Party and, more importantly, to the United States Of America.

which has since come tumbling down!


Hence the DLC via Bill Clinton's Presidency gave us among other things.......



















"Screw 'em," she told her husband. "You don't owe them a thing, Bill. They're doing nothing for you; you don't have to do anything for them."
http://www.americablog.com/2008/04/hillary-clinton-on-w...

(ACTUAL LINKS AVAILABLE HERE: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5587196

Militarized the INS and allowed the pukes to turn immigration into a political football.

Well done. The very idea that the 90s could be repeated is a false hope on the part of some. Nostalgia does not solve today's problems nor will it shape tomorrow's world. I'm much more interested in a promising future for my grandchildren than protecting the Clinton legacy or preserving entitlement for a succession.

Or, better still, it was the result of the Republican takeover of Congress. Because somehow a GOP Congress can make a Dem president look good but can't do the same for a Republican one.

Better, better still -- the peace and prosperity of the 90s was the direct result of Obama calling for change 16 years later.

and I remember being really angry with Clinton when he signed NAFTA. I remember being angry with him over Bosnia. I remember waiting for some followup on Iran-Contra and it never came. Not everything was sweetness and light during those years.

what a blow job was. I didn't really want to go there, but I was given no choice.

....is if the SDs judge her to be the one who can beat McCain in November. It's that simple. It's not about overturning the will of the pledged delegates or the people, it's who can beat Mccain. If they think both candidates can beat McCain, I'm sure they will go with Obama. If, for some reason, Obama is tanking against McCain, and Hillary is beating him, then she is the logical choice.

I don't know what's so hard about that to realize. They will do what is best for the party. If she is nominated, and you would rather see McCain win, vote for him or stay home. If Obama is nominated, all dems should vote for him, but if you can't vote for him and want McCain to win, vote for him or stay home.

The ifs, ands, or buts are over. It has come down to the numbers vs McCain. Would you still want Obama to get the nomination if he was polling 10-15 points behind McCain and Clinton was 10 points ahead of him? I sure wouldn't.

they better throw Clinton out of it as well and appoint a different nominee altogether. I seriously believe that if they overturn in Clinton's favor that there will be many that don't vote for her and we will be saying hello to President McCain. They may as well just throw some names in a hat, ie: John Edwards, Chris Dodd, Kucinich, and others (leaving out Clinton and Obama) and draw out of the hat.

Who IS the real Hillary Clinton?. The woman I am seeing now is not the woman who I voted for Senate. She is looking and sounding more and like McCain, and horrors, like BUSH. Why should my choice be between McCain and a McCain Lite?

I do not like this person I am now seeing. Plain and simple I no longer trust her. I cannot vote for somebody like this. I will stay home.

Mostly because he stands for something.

Principle will out over ego and blind ambition.

We don't need Hillary.

or bring peace to Northern Ireland.

The pilot of the aircraft announced that they were landing in an active war zone in which snipers had been reported. And David Trimble -- Conservative MP who is an unabashed fan of the (American) Republican party -- is the source of the Northern Ireland story.

Surely, a full-time, Full Professor of Law like Barack Obama should not allow his factotums to dissemenate untruths!

Besides, isn't it "time to move on" -- or does that only apply to Rev. Wright, The Race Card, the Kantor video, Obama's campaign manager's career with Big Oil and Nuclear, those big corporate contributions he's gotten, Tony Rezko, the massive whispering campaign on the Internet ...

--p!

:rofl:

--p!

Why would a potential president be so irresponsible as to expose a little kid to sniper fire?

...remember what was going on.

Statements like this make me feel sorry for Senator Obama if he is the Nominee and eventual POTUS. I guess we'll (The Democratic Party) all just kick him, his wife and kids, and his legacy to the curb also in about 10 years time.

There's nothing like a species that eats its own.

You can look up for yourself. Use Google. I'll even http://www.google.com/search?q=ricky+ray+rector&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t">make it easy for you.

Be sure to note which Clinton was involved.

The rest of the campaign "fibs" you repeat I'll leave for others.

Hillary Clinton is not pure by any means. But Obama supporters who invoke the heavenly Millennium are only deceiving themselves.

--p!
Hillary Clinton lies; Barack Obama transforms the narrative.

Ironically, most everything you said about Obama I said about Bill Clinton when I was in my 20's in 1992.

This says it all for me:

Quote:

As if you hadn't noticed, Barack Obama is deeply inspiring on the campaign trail. While the Clinton campaign has engaged in cannibalistic, slash and burn politics, metaphorically knifing her opponent in the gut at every opportunity, Obama has been recruiting a new generation of voters that have been sickened by the politics of stupid five-second sound bites, and aiming to rework the tired old electoral map originally characterized by Tim Russert as a divide of "red and blue."

:kick: