Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Your post also makes a flawed assumption! It assumes we love Hillary and all she stands for. This is not always true. She would have been the best candidate for the job but please don't deify her like the Obama cult has done him. Many of us think Obama would put the country in grave danger. His racial fight for the job has pushed racial tensions to the limit. Death threats to those who disagree with him. His Hoodwink and Bamboozle speeches to name a few. So as you hide behind she told me to do it try to think of the big picture. The Democratic Party has condoned this behavior. The party has stamped it's approval on this type of fight. Without consequences this will become the norm. I believe four years of a Republican will tell the party they must change. I hold the party accountable for this mess. I will never ever vote for Obama. He shouldn't even have been in the race if not for race and that is a shame. A person whose biggest qualification was a "COMMUNITY ORGANIZER" 130 present votes,not even a year in the Senate before running, PLEASE HE SHOULD BE THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN THE WORLD! SPARE ME! GET REAL!
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Monday, June 16, 2008
Rep. Jim Clyburn
The Post and Courier
Rep. Jim Clyburn
MYRTLE BEACH — South Carolina Rep. James Clyburn has earmarked millions of taxpayer dollars this decade for projects that could directly benefit his friends and family members, a newspaper reported Sunday.
The Sun News of Myrtle Beach found that Clyburn has set aside at least $6.2 million for such projects.
That includes money for two projects his nephew was to help design, a community center that runs a program employing his sister-in-law and a Columbia wellness center that employs his daughter.
Clyburn is the House majority whip. He was the sole sponsor for 32 earmarks totaling $38.8 million in the current budget.
In contrast, all of South Carolina's other lawmakers combined to sole-sponsor $45.5 million in earmarks in the same budget.
Clyburn's office did not return calls seeking comment, although he has repeatedly defended the earmark process, telling reporters last year that the special provisions help provide for community needs.
'I don't see that as wasteful government spending,' he told reporters in February 2007. 'I see that as responding to the needs these people said they had.'
Citizens Against Government Waste, a nonprofit group that watches taxpayer money, calls Clyburn 'hostile' toward taxpayers because of what is termed an extravagant use of public money.
'Mr. Clyburn is notorious for questionable earmarks,' said Leslie Paige, a spokeswoman for the group.
The group once named Clyburn as its Porker of the Month because he set aside $3 million in a military spending bill for the First Tee nonprofit agency. First Tee operates a program at a Columbia golf course named for the congressman. Clyburn defended the money on the House floor, saying the money would benefit military families.
This year's budget includes at least four earmarks that could benefit people close to Clyburn.
The veteran lawmaker helped secure $784,000 for the planning and design of the International African-American Museum in Charleston. Clyburn's nephew, Derrick Ballard, is one of the lead architects on that project.
Similarly, in 2005, Clyburn earmarked $145,500 for a community center to be designed by Ballard.
He also set aside $229,000 in this year's budget to the Charles R. Drew Wellness Center in Columbia — a facility he helped construct with a 2003 earmark of $990,000. His daughter, Angela, is the marketing and membership director there.
He got $282,000 appropriated for The South Sumter Resource Center, where his sister-in- law, Gwendolyn, is housing coordinator for the center's community development division. He's secured $670,000 for the resource center in past budgets.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Thursday, June 12, 2008
I wanted to drop you a quick note about a major policy change here at the Democratic Party.
As we move toward the general election, the Democratic Party has to be the Party of ordinary Americans, not Washington lobbyists and special interests. So, as of this morning, if you're a federal lobbyist, or if you control political action committee donations, we won't be accepting your contribution.
This is an unprecedented move for a political party to make -- one that has sent shockwaves through Washington and has turned the debate on clean campaigns upside down. We've unilaterally agreed to shut lobbyists out of the process, and are we're relying on people just like you.
Just imagine what hundreds of thousands of Americans donating $20, $30, or $50 at a time can accomplish together. Imagine the signal that it sends to anyone who looks at John McCain's political machine and the special interest money it needs to fuel every move it makes.
We have a chance to change the way business is done in this country, and we're taking the lead. Will you join us and make a contribution right now to help us elect Barack Obama?
I've written before about guys like Charlie Black and Rick Davis, lobbyists who are at the highest levels of McCain's campaign. But they're just the start -- John McCain and the RNC suck up lobbyist money millions of dollars at a time.
In May, McCain had his best fundraising month of the campaign, and it was directly because he refuses to shut special interests out.
But we did, and we need your help. This is an example of the kind of White House Barack Obama would run. Make a contribution to help elect him:
I'll be in touch later about our plans for the general election, but I wanted to let you know about our policy change right away.
LIST OF JUST SAY NO DEAL COALITION MEMBERS:
Monday, June 9, 2008
AS we know from the song Silence like a cancer grows.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Monday, June 2, 2008
Maggie Cries with her head in her pillow. Sundays are hard to accept these days. She finally rolls out of bed and heads to the bathroom for a shower before church. Church has been a Sunday ritual for the past 16 years.
Sundays past were a joyful event. They were a time to put on her pretty dresses and meet with her neighborhood friends. Now things are different.
Hi Mom Dad. Hi Honey. Are you all right? Yeah! Your eyes look puffy. Maggie are you still upset the cheerleaders didn’t pick you again? No! What time did you get in last night? 10 is that ok with you! Why are you always bugging me about what time I’m getting home and the music I like and the kids I hang around with any way? I just don’t want you getting in trouble.
Our great President George W Bush will be on TV tonight and you need to be home to watch it OK. Why? If you plan on going to William & Mary next year you better keep up on current events. Yes Dad. Your grandfather went there. I went there. Your Mother went there and you are going there! Yes Dad.
Isn’t it great that George Bush has set aside money for our church out reach program! This way we can help educate those poor city kids about the pitfalls with drugs and having babies out of wedlock. Yes Dad. Come on Honey let’s get going.
The Cadillac pulls into the church parking lot and Maggie is quick to get into the church and find her friend Dorothy.
Well did you tell him Maggie? Did you tell Darren yet? No not yet. He is leaving for Brown next week. I couldn’t tell him it would wreck everything. He is planning to take over his fathers business when he graduates. This would stop that for sure. I couldn’t do that to him.
Dorothy promises you won’t tell him. What time did you leave Billy's party yesterday? Was Darren still there? He hasn’t talked to me in two months. Do you think he knows? I don’t know? He had to know it was my first time. I was so scared but he wouldn’t stop and I wanted him to be my first. But now what do I do? You have to tell him! NO!
How am I going to become a Doctor like my Dad if I have to drop out of high school pregnant? My father would die if I didn’t become a doctor like him. That is all he ever talks about. Me Going to William & Mary fowling in the family footsteps.
My mother would disown me as a slut. You should hear her talk about the city girls as though they were from another world. Uncivilized heathens bent on living on welfare as immoral sluts and harlots full of corruption and undermining our society.
You could always drive to Canada and get an abortion. My older sisters friend got one here in Texas a few years ago before George Bush became president and made it illegal.
She finished high school went to college and now is a biologist. She is working on a cur for Alzheimer’s that might help Ronald Reagan remember he was president. She has two kids now and is happily married. I cant drive to Canada for starters I don’t have the money secondly I only have a learners permit. Thirdly where would I go?
Please God let me have a miscarriage and forget this one night ever happened! Please God I’ll never have sex again for as long as I live. Please God take this baby from me now so I can live a normal life. Please so I can become a doctor and save lives and help people in need. Please God.
One week later Sunday morning Barbara is heard calling: Maggie get up it’s time for church. John did Maggie get in late last night. No Dear she got home right after school and said she was tired and went right to bed. Maggie get up! John go get her.
Oh no! OH NO NO NO NO Not my baby BARBARAAA!!!! BARBARA!!! Tears and screams. God NO Not my Baby.
Maggie lay still on the bed covered in blood with a bloody coat hanger on the floor next to her.
First to show to my children that I am right when I say to stay away from DRUGS it leads you down the wrong path. Second I want to show the party they need to address the will of the middle class. I will not vote for the elites that put Obama in power. I will not vote to condone short cuts in life or underhanded dealings for personal gain. I am not religious but do believe in the Golden Rule! Treat others the way you would like to be treated. Obama doesn't live by this standard not even an attempted to do so. He will never get my vote and I will do what I can to get McCain elected. THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS DEAD in my eyes forever if Obama is elected. I'm not ready to make nice and don't think I would if I could.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
I think of it as medicine now in order to cure the cancer that is eating the soul of our party. Putting losers in charge the like of Howard Dean and Dumb ass Donna for starters has to stop.
There is no shame letting the old Democratic die.Hell it was created as a spin off. The Federalist are now gone and so will the Democrats. Hillary and Bill should start the new Party! They have the clout money and right now 18 million people who would join them.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina broke the rules also But they did not take away the delegates from those states Why? .
Rule 11.A specifically set the date for the primaries & caucuses for those three states as "no earlier than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February" (Iowa), "no earlier than 14 days before the first Tuesday in February" (New Hampshire), and "no earlier than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February" (South Carolina).
Iowa held their caucuses on January 3rd. That's more than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February. New Hampshire held their primary on January 8th. That's more than 17 days before the first Tuesday in February. And South Carolina held their primary on January 26th. That's more than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February.
* 3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago
Rule 11.A. of the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention states the following:
11. TIMING OF THE DELEGATE SELECTION PROCESS
A. No meetings, caucuses, conventions or primaries which constitute the first determining stage in the presidential nomination process (the date of the primary in primary states, and the date of the first tier caucus in caucus states) may be held prior to the first Tuesday in February or after the second Tuesday in June in the calendar year of the national convention.
3 weeks ago
Provided, however, that the Iowa precinct caucuses may be held no earlier than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February; that the Nevada first-tier caucuses may be held no earlier than 17 days before the first Tuesday in February; that the New Hampshire primary may be held no earlier than 14 days before the first Tuesday in February; and that the South Carolina primary may be held no earlier than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February. In no instance may a state which scheduled delegate selection procedures on or between the first Tuesday in February and the second Tuesday in June 1984 move out of compliance with the provisions of this rule.
3 weeks ago
sign the petition have Florida and Michigan counted:
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Posted on Tue May 27, 2008 at 08:21:44 AM EST
Tags: 2008, caucuses, primaries (all tags)
Share This: Digg This!! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit
What has 2008 shown us in terms of the fairness of the Democratic nomination process? That the caucus system is neither fair nor representative.
Here's an interesting report on the differences between primaries and caucuses and the impact in the 2008 Presidential nomination. I am reprinting it with the permission of its author, P. Cronin. It addresses:
* Voter Suppression in Caucuses
* Disenfranchised Voter Groups & Statistics
* Differential in Voter Turnout Rates
* Popular Vote Disparity
* Estimated Voter Suppression in 2008 Caucuses
* Caucus Systems Distort Election Results
* Vote-spread Differences
* Disproportionate Votes-to-Delegates Ratio
* More Math of Electability
* Other Primary versus Caucus Considerations
* 2008 Democratic Election Snapshot
* What IF: Florida & Michigan
Some highlights are below, but I recommend reading the entire report. [More....]
Here are some stats:
* By the numbers, in 2008 primaries have averaged 400% greater voter turnout in eligible voters than caucuses.
* Of the 33.5 million popular votes in the 2008 Democratic Primaries, caucus voters have
collectively cast only 3.2% of the total or 1.1 million votes.
* the 13 caucus states have 23.2 million eligible voters. The average Democratic voter turnout in 2008 caucuses has been 4.5% versus 19.92% in primaries.
* 42% of Obama’s wins are caucus states, 95% of Clinton’s wins are primary states.
Three states have both caucuses and primaries. Take a look at the different results as to voter turnout and preference in the Democratic race:
* Washington: On February 9, Washington held its statewide caucus and an estimated 245,000 caucus-goers – 5.3% of eligible voters – chose Obama over Clinton by 67.5% to 31.2%, a whopping 36-point margin. Ten days later, WA held a primary attended by 691,381 [15% of eligible voters, ie, almost 3 times the caucus turnout] and Obama won by 51.2% to 45.7%. [Citizens of WA voted-in a State-run Primary. However, the Party-run caucus results are still the legal results.]
Washington allocated its 78 pledged delegates at a ratio of 2:1 [67% to 33%] and Obama got 52 versus Clinton’s 26. He gained 26 delegates. If the pledged delegates had been allocated according to the primary results, Obama would have won roughly 41 delegates compared to Clinton’s 37. He would be gained only 4 delegates. Bottom line: The caucus vs. primary election benefited Obama by a net 22 delegates – 14.5% of the 152 pledged delegates separating the two.
* Nebraska: On February 9, Nebraska held a caucus and only 3.04% of the 1.3 million eligible voters participated. Those 38,571 caucus-goers chose Obama over Clinton 68% to 32% and he won 16 of the 24 pledged delegates. In stark contrast, on May 13th, Nebraska held a primary where nearly 94,000 voters [7.5% of eligible voters] chose Obama by 49.4% to 46.6% ,– only 2.8% instead of the 36% vote-spread recorded in the caucus. If delegates were allocated on the results of the primary instead of the caucus, Obama and Clinton would have received 12 pledged delegates each.
Bottom line: Obama’s 13,700 vote victory in the red-state Nebraska caucus netted him 8 pledged delegates. Compare that to Clinton’s 204,000 vote victory in the battleground state of Ohio which netted her only 9 pledged delegates.
The third state is Texas, and the report has a section on that aw well.
The report asks, "which states are more important to win in the General Election? Which are a stronger indicator of candidate strength and offer a better barometer for voter preference for the Democratic nominee?"
Obama’s 138 pledged delegates lead derived from the 12 caucus states he won is only 18 less than Clinton’s 156 pledged delegates won from all of these hard-fought, primary states: California, Texas, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Indiana, Tennessee, Arizona, Oklahoma, Arkansas, New Mexico, West Virginia, New Hampshire and Rhode Island.
These Clinton-won states have a combined 220 electoral votes, 87.2 million eligible voters and cast a total of 18,400,000 votes in these primaries. Compare that with the Obama-won caucus states with a combined 69 electoral votes, 21.5 million eligible voters and only 944,000 total votes cast.
The stats show what happens when all states are weighted equally:
42% of Obama’s wins have been in caucus states wherein one-half have not voted Democratic since 1964, 70% voted Republican in 2004, 8 out of the 13 states had only 8,700 to 43,900 voters each and there is a total of 74 electoral votes for all caucus states.
In other words, a comparison of the two systems shows:
* suppressed voter turnout in caucus vs. primary states
* lopsided vote-spread differential between Obama and Clinton in the caucus vs. primary states
* relative impact of caucus elections on the allocation of pledged delegates to each candidate
* disproportionate impact of caucus votes in relation to convention delegates
On the lopsided vote apread differential:
In 2008, the 34 primaries [excluding MI & FL] have produced an average .8 percent vote-difference between Obama and Clinton. By contrast, the 13 caucuses have had a 28 percent vote-spread.
Because of the restrictions inherent in the caucusing process, participants traditionally include the most motivated voters, party partisans & loyalists and voters strongly committed to a candidate and/or the voting process itself. Since this is generally a relatively small subset of all voters, true voter preferences can be skewed.
The result is "a disproportionate allocation per candidate of the 498 pledged delegates allotted to the caucus states [including TX caucus]".
35 Primaries w/FL :
33,832,107 total votes
Clinton + 35,387
Clinton + 62 delegates
13 Caucuses + TX :
1,057,137 total votes
Obama + 299,768
Obama + 193 delegates
In other words:
35 Primaries with 33.8 million voters have Clinton leading in both votes and delegates.
Caucuses with 1.1 million voters gave Obama 300,000 more votes and 193 more delegates.
....After 47 state elections to date, Obama leads Clinton by 152 pledged delegates. 97% of the difference – 148 delegates – is directly attributable to lopsided victories in caucus contests.
As to the disproportionate impact of the caucus results:
Though voters in all 13 caucus states have cast only 3.2% of the total 33.5 million votes so far – those votes control 15.3% of the pledged delegates and 16.4% of the Super delegates sent to the DNC Convention – average 15.5% of the total delegates [626 caucus / 4047 total]. After all remaining primaries the total votes could easily top 36 million, dropping the caucus vote to 2.9% of the total. In that event, 1 out of every 34 votes will determine and control 1 of every 6.5 delegates.
Bottom line: caucus voters will have a grossly disproportionate role in determining the 2008 Democratic nominee.
Put another way:
* 34 Primary States -32.4 Million Votes
* 13 Caucus States -1.1 Million Votes
* 3.2% of the vote controls 15.5% of the delegate selection for the 2008 Democratic Convention.
97% of pledged delegate difference between Obama and Clinton is directly related to the caucus victories, caucus delegates’ account for 1 in every 6.5 DNC delegates and nearly 2/3 of those delegates will vote pro-Obama essentially giving them substantially more clout in determining the 2008 Democratic nominee.
On the impact on the electoral math and map:
21 of Obama’s 29 states won are either caucus states or Red states – including 80% of the deepest Red that have not voted Democratic since 1964 to 1976. With a win in SD and MT, he will finish with 230 Electoral Votes –121 of those from Red states.
Notably, if Obama is the Democratic nominee, he will start the race for the Presidency with 109 Electoral Votes from blue or purple states. That’s 40% of what he’ll need to win in November.
In contrast, only one of Clinton’s 20 states won is a caucus and only 26% of her total Electoral Votes are from Red states. Further, 227 of Clinton’s 308 EV are from blue and purple states meaning that she would start the Presidential race having won states that account for 84% of the EV needed to win the White House.
The 13 Caucus states comprise 26% of all states voting in the 2008 Democratic Preference Election but account for only 74 of the total 538 Electoral Votes in the General Election.
....70% of the caucus states -- – 9 of 13 -- – voted Republican in the 2004 General Election. Those states held 45 of the 74 total electoral votes for all caucus states. In 2000, 8 of the 13 states [62%] voted for Bush.
....There are 185.7 million total eligible voters [VEP] in the 47 state contests held so far. Clinton has won states with 104.9 million eligible voters and Obama has won states with 80.8 million. Moreover, based on VEP, the average Democratic voter turnout in Clinton’s states was 20.1% compared to 15.4% turnout in Obama’s states [17 primaries @ 19.4% turnout and 12 caucuses @ 4.4% turnout]. MI & FL are excluded.
....The United States has a total of 538 electoral votes and 270 are needed to win the Presidency. Clinton has won 18 states with 264 electoral votes versus Obama’s 29 states with 224 electoral votes. MI & FL are excluded.
Page 11 lists a host of reasons caucuses are less representative and fair than primaries. It then finds:
When the results of all 34 primaries are totaled and averaged there is only a .8% vote differential and .8% difference in total delegates –Obama is ahead by 259,000 votes out of 32.4 million and Clinton is ahead by 24 delegates out of 3,114.
When Florida is added in, Clinton leads by 62 delegates and 35,387 votes. These dead-heat Primary results closely parallel national polls in the two candidate match-up since Super Tuesday.
On Florida and Michigan:
Since the DNC stripped Florida and Michigan of their delegates, results from these primaries have purposely been omitted from most discussion till now. No Democratic candidate campaigned or ran political ads in either state. However, since both states conducted a legitimate Primary election and posted certified results and since the states have a combined 44 electoral votes and nearly 20 million eligible voters that cast a cumulative 2,345,000 votes [twice the number of all caucus votes and roughly 7% of total votes] readers may want to consider the voter preferences expressed in order to assess candidate electability for the General Election.
After several graphs of number-crunching, the report finds:
If Florida and Michigan are added to all election results, Clinton would gain another 27 and 17 electoral votes respectively and would have a total of 308 – 38 more than the 270 needed to win the Presidency in the General Election. Obama’'s 29 states won have 224 electoral votes which would be 46 short of the 270 needed to win.
Finally, if Florida and Michigan are added to the 47 state elections already concluded [34 primaries + 13 caucus states] there are 205.5 million total eligible voters [VEP]. Clinton has won states with 124.7 million eligible voters and Obama has won states with 80.8 million. In this instance, Clinton would have won 19 primaries versus 17 for Obama.
On the topic of built-in voter suppression, the report explains how and why these groups are not fairly represented:
* Elderly / hospitalized / ill health
* Military oversees or on out-of-state assignment
* Voters out of state
* Voters with kids – especially small children – who can’t get or afford a babysitter
* Workers who can not get time off work, or who can’t afford the time off
* Citizens with limited English proficiency [estimated at 8 to 10 Million voters nationwide]
In conclusion, the report quotes "“Has America Outgrown the Caucus?”" by Tova Wang, a Democracy Fellow at The Century Foundation:
Caucuses, as opposed to primaries, by their very structure violate fundamental principles of voting rights. Their time-consuming, inflexible, Byzantine procedures discourage broad participation, presenting substantial barriers to the right to vote. It is not that the caucuses violate the Constitution—they are run by the parties, not the states, and do not violate voting rights as a matter of law. Rather, because of their exclusionary nature, they go against some of the core values we express when we talk about voting rights, such as the fundamental nature of the right, equality of opportunity to participate in the process, and fair access to the ballot.
Regardless of what reforms are considered, it is clear that the caucus is a deeply flawed method for selecting a nominee, and this problem can no longer be shunted aside.
.... Caucuses, as they are currently conducted, do not respect those rights and should not continue in their current form going forward.
The report concludes:
[I]t'’s been shown that caucus elections not only suppress voter participation but also literally systemically disenfranchise voters such as people with disabilities, military personnel on assignment, those physically incapable of participation and all other would-be voters who can not meet the “exact time and place” physical
attendance requirement. Likewise, it’s clear that caucus elections skew overall voting results and have a disproportionate impact on selection of the Democratic nominee for President at the DNC convention.
From a voting rights standpoint the questions become: When millions of Americans are filtered-out or systemically lockedout of the caucusing process, how can we say we have a nominee who is chosen democratically, by the will of the people? When so many citizens are excluded from the voting process how can we trust the outcome of elections?
....[I]t seems clear that the voter preference of the 34 million citizens who have voted through the open, inclusive Primary system should receive the more serious consideration. Their voices have shown a near-tie race between Clinton and Obama, with Clinton having an edge in both delegates and votes.
While this is the system we have, and in 2008 it's not possible to change the rules in hindsight, we have more than 800 superdelegates who can change their mind up until the convention. The questions they need to ask themselves before making a final commitment:
Which candidate has the best overall education, experience and skill-set to prepare them for the Presidency? Which candidate is better suited to withstand the Republican attacks and unrelenting scrutiny? What core constituencies does each candidate draw? What is the size and voting record of those groups? How marginalized would each group’s vote become in their state’s overall election results in the General Election? How many voters will be lost if “their” candidate is
not nominated, ie, will not vote at all or will cross-over and become the 2008 Reagan Democrats? Which future, powerful voting blocks are at stake, eg, Latinos and youth and would they vote for McCain? Which states are “must wins” for the needed electoral votes? In this Democratic Preference Election, which candidate emerges having won most of those “must win” states?
The superdelegates can decide that all delegates and states won should not be weighted equally in selecting the Democratic nominee. Will they? Probably not. But the system does need to change for 2012 so we don't go through this again.
Update: Several commenters have asked for more information about the author of the report, P. Cronin. Here it is:
Peniel Cronin is the President & CEO of Global Basics and eNameWiz.com. Cronin holds a B.S. in Accounting from Arizona State University and has 16 years experience as an accountant and Director of Marketing for several SMEs.
Cronin directs all strategic development and product/market research and developed the algorithms and database that power the eNameWiz multilingual domain creation and search system.
Representative clients through Global Basics have included the Arizona Office of Tourism, the Nevada Commission on Tourism, the Arizona Shopping Consortium, Shop America Alliance, America West Airlines, Southwest Airlines, AeroMexico and numerous other travel and domain industry organizations. Cronin holds three US & German Patents, several trademarks and numerous copyrights.
Cronin suffers from a disability resulting from a car accident 40 years ago at age 12 which left her "wheelchair bound" for two years, at a time when there were no curb cuts or ramps and nothing was accessible. This is what fueled her passion about the caucus information. She knows what it's like to be locked-out of the mainstream and to be excluded from full participation in what others take for granted.
< The Electoral Map: Can Obama Overcome the Challenges? | Final Media Walk-Through for Denver Convention >
Friday, May 23, 2008
By Jonathan Last
Inquirer Editorial Board
Lost in the excitement of Barack Obama's coronation this week was an inconvenient fact of Tuesday's results: Hillary Clinton netted approximately 150,000 votes and is now poised to finish the primary season as the popular-vote leader. In some quaint circles, presumably, these things still matter.
Real Clear Politics keeps track of six versions of the popular-vote total. They are, in ascending order of inclusivity: (1) the popular vote of sanctioned contests; (2) the total of sanctioned contests, plus estimated votes from the Iowa, Nevada, Maine and Washington caucuses; (3) the popular vote plus Florida; (4) popular vote plus Florida and the caucuses; (5) the popular vote plus Florida and Michigan; (6) popular vote plus Florida, Michigan, and the caucus estimates. After Tuesday, Clinton now leads in two of these six counts.
If you believe that the most important precept in democratic politics is to "count every vote," then the sixth category is the most inclusive, and here Clinton leads Obama by 71,301 votes. Of course, this includes the Michigan result, where Sen. Obama had removed his name from the ballot. So while it may be the most inclusive, it may not be the most fair.
The third and fourth counts - the ones which include Florida - seem more fair. Here, Obama is clinging to a slight lead of 146,786 votes (257,008, with the caucus estimates). However, with Puerto Rico, Montana, and South Dakota remaining, he will almost certainly finish behind her in these counts, likely by a few hundred thousand votes.
But could Clinton take over the lead in all of the popular-vote tabulations? Quite possibly. In Puerto Rico's last major election, two million people voted. Let's assume that turnout for this historic vote - Puerto Rico has never had a presidential primary before - will be equal to or greater than that turnout.
If Clinton were to win Puerto Rico by 20 points she would pick up at least a 400,000-vote margin. This would allow her to swamp Obama in the popular-vote counts, which include Florida, making her the leader in four of the six permutations of the popular vote. At that point, Obama would be left clinging to the least-inclusive count, which he now leads by 441,558 votes (551,780, including caucuses).
To understand how razor-thin this majority is, consider that if the Puerto Rico turnout is slightly larger than we have imagined - or Clinton's margin is slightly greater - then Clinton would finish the primary process leading in every conceivable vote count. With two million voters, a 28 percent victory would put Clinton over the top even in the count, which excludes Florida and Michigan and includes estimates for Obama's caucus victories.
It is this looming prospect which explains the tremendous pressure Obama partisans and the media are putting on Clinton to drop out of the race. They want her gone now because they understand that she has an excellent chance of finishing as the undisputed people's choice.
Would it matter if Clinton were the undisputed (or even disputed) popular-vote winner? That's hard to say. The question is, matter to whom? The superdelegates will determine the nominee and there's no telling what will sway them. They have no objective criteria from which to make their decisions. But if they were to deny the popular-vote champ the nomination, there is a real question of whether Democratic voters would reconcile themselves to the decision. As it is, much of the talk about Democratic defections in November has been overstated.
Partisan voters almost always come home after their candidate loses. The problem arises when a candidate's supporters believe that their guy (or gal) didn't lose. Expect the chorus calling for Clinton's withdrawal to grow louder over the next week, with people insisting that she has no "path to victory."
Clinton's path is both obvious and simple: Win the popular vote and force Barack Obama and his cheerleaders to explain why that doesn't matter.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Their party officials are organized and fair. Opps! Not quite the facts when you look at the running around they have done to try to fix what they screwed up with Fl and MI.
Their members are people of conviction and responsibility. Not the case as we see with Super Delegates. Not a backbone among them!
They have great insight! Even a blind bat could have seen this FL&MI mess coming the day it was imposed.
They respect the will of the people they represent! Once more not quite the facts. Super Delegates in states that have gone overwhelmingly toward Hillary "like Ted Kennedy. used his weight to endorse Obama.
The concept and idea of Super Delegate is in fact unfair and doesn't respect the will of the people.
The Caucus system is unfair to those who work for a living.
They know how to pick a winner. McGovern anyone! Dukakis, Kerry, Gore,Mondale,Carters 2nd run,and enough is enough Humphrey.
All told of 43 presidents only 13 have been Democrats.
You have to ask why! As we see now the DNC is a screwed up organization. Far from the ideals that formed the party a voice for the working man and the less fortunate. They have become a party of elites. Just the idea of a Super Delegate is an elitist concept. Your vote can't be trusted.We have to create a SUPER just in case you screw up. We have to create caucus system only for the "most devote Democrats".
Even if Hillary wins I still will never support the DNC until it has MAJOR REFORMS
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Monday, May 19, 2008
Friday, May 16, 2008
When we're able to campaign in a place like Iowa for several months and I can visit and talk to people individually, I do very well. That's harder to do at this stage in the campaign," Obama said in a brief telephone interview Friday. "And once we get past the primary, we'll ble to focus more on those states where we need to make sure people know my track record."
This sounds ridiculous. You can visit every person personally in Iowa in a few months. You could knock on every door in the whole state .
Read the whole thing.
About Obama's money:
Here is a most recent list of Registered Federal Lobbyists who have bundled money for Barack Obama. Click on the links to see bundling and lobby information from White House For Sale.
Timothy Broas - $100,000+
Frank Clark - $200,000+
Howard Gutman - $200,000+
Scott Harris - $200,000+
Allan Katz - $200,000 +
William Lake - $50,000+
Robert S. Litt - $ Not Revealed
Kenneth Lore - $50,000+
Thomas J. Perrelli - $200,000+
Thomas A. Reed - $200,000+
Paul N. Roth - $50,000+
Alan Solomont - $100,000+
Robert M. Sussman $50,000+
Tom E. Wheeler - $100,00+
Total: $1,700,000+ dollars in bundled money from known registered Federal Lobbyists.
Let me clarify here before we get into a pissing match. Right or wrong, just about every presidential candidate who ever lived has collected money from lobbyists either directly or via bundling. The only difference here is Barack Obama denies it. And that is just plain unacceptable.
Enviro | 05.16.2008 - 11:07 pm | #
1. A write-in vote for Clinton, IS A VOTE FOR OBAMA
2. A vote for nobody, IS A VOTE FOR OBAMA
3. A vote for McCain, IS A VOTE FOR CLINTON
1. If Obama wins in the fall, Hillary will never be President and her and Bill are sent out to pasture as the Democratic party becomes the party of the Obamas
2. If Obama loses in the fall, Hillary becomes the de facto leader of the Democratic party and presumptive nominee in 2012
Will you allow the DNC and MSNBC to take away vote, or will you take material steps to re-take control of your party and your country?
It's up to you!
JoeCHI | 05.16.2008 - 11:17 am | #
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Has it occurred to anyone this was planned? We all know Rev. Wright was the Republican bomb that would sink many Democrats in their bid for reelection, the NC Republican ad showed that pretty well. Obama had to throw Wright under the bus and still look like he wasn't a hypocrite. The Reverend fell on his sward so Obama could do this and make a break that seemed real! He had to make a break on a personal level to seem real a break that would get as much news coverage as possible. I think this was all staged to give Obama and his super delegates cover.
Friday, April 25, 2008
Rev. Wrights chickens are coming home to roost! The great community organizer of the South Side of Chicago should be held accountable for all the violence in the South Side as well. 40 shootings this past week 13 murders. How well did Barack Obama bring people together what problems did he solve in the South Side? Perhaps the hate filled “I’m a victim” speeches of Rev. Wright manifest themselves in violence throughout the community? Perhaps we should look a litter closer at Obama’s claim he brought people together as a community organizer?
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
The Democratic party is a joke!
There is no captain of the ship. Howard Dean PLEASE. Pansy Super Delegates and Donna Brazile on the rules committee. I think it is time for our party to start acting like we knowwhat we are doing and make a decision. The idea of proportionality obviously doesn't work and Balless Super Delegates doesn't work no wonder we are always getting our ass kicked.
We are all worker bees and there is no president of our company. Republicans are use to being the boss their rules make sence and play favorites. We on the other hand will not take a stand and say NY and CA should be winner take all states. These states should dictate the party, not Wyoming or Iowa PLEASE wake up.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Every child knows to chose their friends to pass the mom and dad test. You all have heard Birds of a feather flock together. Look it up on google if you want and you will find hundreds 0f examples in the corporate world and how to be a positive force in society by choosing your friends wisely.
ABC did us a favor and it should not be dismissed so lightly by Barack or any of his fans since none of you really know him as far as you can throw a piano.
PLEASE EXPLAIN FURTHER BARACK. HOW YOU RELATE TO THE RELIGIOUS GUN CLINGING SMALL TOWN FAMILYS OF PA.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
The condescending statements by The Messiah prove he is unelectable. When Hillary wins PA will the Super Delegates wake up? John Kerry wind surfing comes to mind. What a mistake that guy turned out to be. I cant help but think how out of touch those in Washington really are. What are they doing all day? The concept of a black guy being president is so appealing to them they will take a racist, with no experience and a lying silver tongue over a competent woman.We all should pay so they can prove to themselves "the privileged" that they themselves are not racist is a price to high in my book . Don't be bamboozled and hoodwinked by barack,barry the messiah malcolm x wannabe obama.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
this is what he said.
April 11, 2008
OBAMA: So, it depends on where you are, but I think it's fair to say that the places where we are going to have to do the most work are the places where people are most cynical about government. The people are mis-appre...they're misunderstanding why the demographics in our, in this contest have broken out as they are. Because everybody just ascribes it to 'white working-class don't wanna work -- don't wanna vote for the black guy.' That's...there were intimations of that in an article in the Sunday New York Times today - kind of implies that it's sort of a race thing.
Here's how it is: in a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long. They feel so betrayed by government that when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn't buy it. And when it's delivered by -- it's true that when it's delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama, then that adds another layer of skepticism.
But -- so the questions you're most likely to get about me, 'Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What is the concrete thing?' What they wanna hear is so we'll give you talking points about what we're proposing -- to close tax loopholes, uh you know uh roll back the tax cuts for the top 1%, Obama's gonna give tax breaks to uh middle-class folks and we're gonna provide healthcare for every American.
But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there's not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
Um, now these are in some communities, you know. I think what you'll find is, is that people of every background -- there are gonna be a mix of people, you can go in the toughest neighborhoods, you know working-class lunch-pail folks, you'll find Obama enthusiasts. And you can go into places where you think I'd be very strong and people will just be skeptical. The important thing is that you show up and you're doing what you're doing.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
NYT CHRIS MATTHEWS LINK
Part of this can be viewed purely through a bottom-line lens. Matthews’s contract expires next year, and NBC officials clearly would like to renew it for considerably less than the $5 million a year he is making now. Whether it’s a formal talking point or not, NBC officials seem bent on conveying the message that they could get the same ratings, or better ones, for considerably less money.
Maybe he could get a job dancing with OBAMA GIRL being Obama head cheerleader.
Monday, April 7, 2008
Saturday, April 5, 2008
Friday, April 4, 2008
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
of a New Year to keep before you the painful
truth of who we are and where it is we are in
this racist United States of America!What’s
The reality, however, is that the entire war in
Iraq and the larger “war on terror” have been
based on lies, half-truths and distortions to
serve the agenda of the United States imperialism.
Where is the public outcry? Where is the
outrage? What’s goin’ on?Excuse me! The victims of Hurricane Katrina
are no longer on the radar screen of the media.
Only Barack, his church, his pastor and white
arrogance!Sunday, January 21, 2007 10 © Sermons copyrighted by Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jrhttp://www.tucc.org/upload/tuccbulletin_jan21.pdf
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Saturday, March 29, 2008
WHAT DOES THE MAN STAND FOR? DIVIDE AND CONQUER ALONG RACIAL LINES JUST LIKE REV.WRIGHT.
Friday, March 28, 2008
Given, Barack is a smart, calculating guy. He chose this church for a reason. Not because he grew up in it (like he is indoctrinating his daughters) as most children do in this country. This is a separatist church in the vein of Malcolm X. The chickens coming home to roost, the feeling of resentment and how the black community has been oppressed since slavery teachings.The 8000 members Barack would be in contact with is a plausable reason to join.It is easy to motivate a group of people against an enemy, a feeling of injustice that has been done to one by another could be putty in the hands of such an ambitious guy could be the reason. This is the moto of this church. Plain and simply BLACK AGAINST WHITE. NO IFS OR BUTS ABOUT IT. This feeling of injustice runs deep in Barack and ( I'VE NEVER BEEN PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN IN MY ADULT LIFE) Mrs Obama.
I think it divides our country. This church continues a message hate and REVENGE and blame of todays blacks.
WILL BARACK IF ELECTED PUSH FOR SOME SORT OF REPARATIONS SOME PAY BACK FOR SLAVERY. This is who Barack chose to be. This is what this church is all about.
Like most religions using God to explain a specific point of viewis common. Using GOD to justify what ever action you want from your followers is the rule since the Bible was written. Using GOD to explain why martyrdom is good is the code for Islam extremists ! His connection with Rev. Wright is scary! The dividing tone of this church is scary! Michelle Obama is scary. How Barack Obama chose this church is scary.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Obama has taken $1,180,103 from the top issuers of subprime loans. [cq.com]
Obama received $266,907 from Lehman. [Cq.com]
Obama received $5395 from GMAC. [Cq.com]
Obama received $150,850 from CS First Boston . [Cq.com]
Obama received $11,250 from Countrywide. [Cq.com]
Obama received $9052 from Washington Mutual. [Cq.com]
Obama received $161,850 from Citigroup. [Cq.com]
Obama received $4600 from CBASS. [Cq.com]
Obama received $170,050 from Morgan Stanley. [Cq.com]
Obama received $1150 from Centex. [Cq.com]
Obama received $351,900 from Goldman Sachs. [Cq.com]
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Friday, March 21, 2008
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Can we buy reconciliation and is he that cheap.
Monday, March 17, 2008
The Messiah took that phrase from Malcolm X.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Here is what I posted on Obama's Huffpo blog.
I'm posting it here because I seriously doubt it will get posted there:
Let me give you a lesson in good judgment Mr. Obama.
When I was in High School, I was a popular kid, captain of the football team type. One day, I made friends with this quirky kid, somewhat out of sympathy because he wasn't very popular and because
I like to make friends no matter who a person may be. About one year after we became friends, I guess he felt really comfortable around me because he gave me a brochure and a pamphlet and asked me to attend a KKK meeting with him, then he mentioned other kids I was friends with who were already members. I immediately shoved his papers back into his hands and told him what I thought about racists like the KKK and never had anything more to do with him after that day. All those other kids he told me about never spoke to me again and always gave me weird looks. But I could care less.
Now you on the other hand walked into a Church where the pastor openly spoke hatred about his country and about White people over 20 years ago. What was your judgment then? You could have got up and left. But you didn't. I think it's because you knew that you needed to be a member of that Church in order to fulfill your political ambitions in that part of Chicago.
Again speaking about your judgment, Rev Wright made some of his anti-American comments back in the year 2003. What did you do? Did you renounce his comments then? No. Did you stop going to hear his sermons? No.
There’s an article in the New York Times which clearly demonstrates that you and your campaign knew Rev. Wright’s hate filled sermons would hurt you in this election over a year ago and how you were taking steps to limit the potential damage. Did you show the good judgment to renounce Wright’s comments then? No.
Mr. Obama, there’s this all too familiar pattern coming from you and your campaign in this election, in that after everyone of your electoral losses, your campaign immediately attacks someone close to Hillary Clinton as being a racist. Not only do I find these attacks on Hillary Clinton as being all too convenient, I marvel at the hutzpah you have displayed, especially now considering all of the racism you so willingly subjected yourself to at your Church. Why is your feigned outrage on racism only targeted at your electoral opponent, but not at your mentor for the past twenty years? And he’s not your “crazy Uncle” as you have tried to downplay him. He’s your chosen mentor, in your own words.
Also, as I’m sure you are well aware, there’s this anti-White speech in the movie Malcolm X where the fictional Malcolm X blames White people for all of what ails the Black community. How do I know that you know about this hate filled speech? Because you crib whole lines from it and recite them whenever you speak in front of mostly Black audiences. You really get a good laugh when you say “That’s what they do! They bamboozle you! They hoodwink you”, because you know what those words mean in front of that audience.
Just as I could see right though George W. Bush back in 2000, and I knew he was a fraud and I took the heat for calling him one, I know that you too are a fraud. And I see right though you. You should be ashamed of yourself for what you have done to the Clintons. But I’m sure you hate them just as much as your mentor Wright has shown that he does, other wise you would have shown the “good judgment” to walk away from his hate speech twenty years ago, just as I walked away from the KKK 30 years ago.
Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
HERE IT IS FROM WISDOM QUOTES.COM
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Jacks you tube ad.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Several US political fundraisers are currently on trial for corruption in connection with loans received from Auchi. Auchi is currently barred from entering the US by the state department as an undesirable alien.
Nadhmi Auchi was viewed with a lot of suspicion by the Iraqi opposition to Saddam Hussein's regime, regarding him as a front-man for Saddam's intelligence service. Auchi was involved in several multi-billion business deals in the post-Saddam era too, such as the Orascom mobile phone network (IraqNa), and at least one power generation contract involving Chicago-based tycoon Antoin Rezko and Iraq's former Minister of Electricity, Aiham Alsamarrae, who has been convicted over corruption charges in Iraq and is now living in Chicago.
This is a quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadhmi_Auchi
why did he give his now famous speech?His friends and money people told him to .
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Obama begins with a broad assessment of life in America in 2008, and life is not good: we're a divided country, we're a country that is "just downright mean," we are "guided by fear," we're a nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents. "We have become a nation of struggling folks who are barely making it every day," she said, as heads bobbed in the pews. "Folks are just jammed up, and it's gotten worse over my lifetime. And, doggone it, I'm young. Forty-four!"
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
"On the other hand, I am Irish. I like being involved in the community. As they say, if you don't educate yourself about the political system you're doomed to be led by inferior people. That's one of my fears."
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Friday, February 29, 2008
The first question remark at the debate is now being used to say Hillary is weak and a complainer. Tucker today. Her remark was to the point the Messiah never has to think on the spot. He is able to take his time and respond to her question rather then having to pose his ideas by himself.” I agree with Hillary” or to rephrase her response as he did with the Russia question! That is what she was complaining about!
It is an injustice to our country to have such a biased press. It will be the down fall of our entire democracy. I hope the Internet can save our society and combat the mega corporations that control our supply of information.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Wisconsin today we will see if they have COME TO OBAMA and drunk the Kool Aid !
The Messiah obama will fail if he gets elected. The to be Obama first lady said this is the first time she is proud to be an American. WOW what a first lady she"d make.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Friday, January 25, 2008
Thursday, January 24, 2008
The media has turned our two best candidates in years or even history into racist petty fighting cats and dogs.
I just heard Leo Terelle"some radio talk show guy" screaming on MSNBC how the black people will not come out to vote if Hillary is the nominee . NOW THAT'S SMART! I watched this unfold. Right after the NH loss by Barack CNN and MSNBC started questioning the TOM BRADLY effect. Michael Eric Dyson and Donna Brazel both questioning whether the people in NEW Hampshire were telling poll takers they voted for Barack but the racist they are couldn't pull the lever for a black man. Then came the Martin Luther King JR. to LBJ comment the media jumped all over saying Hillary was a racist for dissin MLK. Certainly questionable at best and taken totally out of context. Then came the Fairy Tale Remark again HOW was that Racist yet the media was all over it. Then came the drug use by Barack with the Hillary campaign and next BET founder Jhonson.
OK that is the chronology as I see it.
I do have to ask how is any of this racist except in the eyes of the media who want it to be racist to get ratings.
Drug use is racist to whom? I've been to many twelve step program meetings and I will tell you flat out DRUGS DON"T CARE WHAT COLOR RACE, RELIGION OR HOW RICH OR POOR YOU ARE! I fail to see how this is a racial issue. The media wants it to be but how is it? Furthermore the Martin Luther King Jr. needing LBJ to help fulfill his dream is fact not racial or anything but. Hillary was pointing out that Barack was a dreamer not a realist or a doer. That was not racist but questioning his lack of experience. Finally the "Fairy Tale" once again putting in question Baracks voting record since his campaign is based almost exclusively on that one issue. Not racially motivated at all.
So only a pawn in their game but today the pawns are the politicians and we the people, and the chess masters are the major corporations that control the media.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Why is Obama so popular with young people.They can't see through the rose colored glasses of Obama Girls pining for Barack. Think about it, a twenty year old today was in 6th grade when GWB was elected. Do ya think they remember Ronald Reagan? Do you think that is why Obama is so popular with the young crowd and not with the beaten, scared, battle hardened,fathers and mothers of those young idealistic future presidents and industry captains . Think about it!The Hillary supporters have been here before and remember GW Bushes speeches and how Reagan crushed the unions of this country. How GWB said was the uniter and the compassionate one. They appreciate knowledge from ones experiences. They have a deep love for our country and a reverence for hard work. They know politics is a tit for tat system and Hillary knows it too. This tit for tat system has been working for over 200 years and is the reason we are the longest standing democracy in the world. Our system gives weight to tenure and paying dues. To think a rookie untested, unproven, with grand oratory should be in control of the most powerful nation on the planet is what the older generation is concerned about.
Vote with head and heart not just heart.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Monday, January 14, 2008
When has drug use been a racial issue? How is the fact that Barack Obamba used drugs as a kid not legitimate to help show a mans character. WHAT WILL WE TELL OUR CHILDREN!!!! It's OK to use cocaine son you could still be President!!!!!! WTF. Do as I say not as I do! OH wait that might be a racial thing about Barack as well. He talks good but does nothing! Still he needs, wants and (deserves ) your vote because he is Black. PLEASE!!!!! He has a dream!!! SO DO WE ALL!! Just as in life we have to work for what we get. Where is his work?
Friday, January 11, 2008
- SHE TOLD ME TO
- Wait until Obama is President this will truley be ...
- Boos for Clinton
- What do you think the chances are your voice will ...
- Elect this GUY????
- unity my ass
- they stood silent
- I'll wait a while before I start working for McCai...
- Roe v Wade will never be over turned
- NO OBAMA FOR MY CHILDREN
- A new party is needed.
- OBAMA CAN'T WIN
- Rule breakers
- Hillarys best bet
- Here is an article from the Philadelphia Inquire
- Why be a Democrat?
- President of the 57 no 48 United States
- A BLACK MAN IS HIS BIGGEST ASSET
- GREAT IDEA
- Who said she didn't have chrisma
- :Lay of my wife
- We will not vote
- Is he for real
- NO LOBBYISTS!
- Why vote for McCain
- Is he the leader he thinks he is?
- Is he the leader he thinks he is?
- How we got here.
- Joe Wilson and no quarter have it
- Obama taking cover!
- i'm not ready to make nice
- Wake Up America!
- Hold me Accountable!
- Hillary wins PA YAHOO
- Make the call
- Big leagues now for Obama.
- silver spoon and food stamps
- 100 Mayors WOW!
- A speech from Rev Wright or BO
- People turn to guns and religion!
- I hope we could say good riddens to Chris
- Fl and MI votes
- Obama the liar
- Separastist or Uniter
- MLK Jr. Barack Obama
- write in Hillary
- Are we ready for a black president
- Obama and Farrahkan
- Seperation of church and State ?
- baracks OIL connections
- Hoodwinked Politicians
- what bob casey said
- a cool link
- NOW WHAT!
- The man doth protest to much
- don't mess with hill http://www.youtube.com/watch...
- POOR BILL RICHARDSON
- you make the call
- HE IS THE ONE !
- Obama and Wright
- Wide eyed liberals Obamas base
- Popular or Delegate Count
- The Racial Messiah
- JUDGEMENT OBAMA STYLE
- HERMAN GORING &JOHN MCCAIN
- The Messiah and Revered Wright
- Nothing sexier then a woman you have to salute
- How will McCain win
- Why did Barack speak out against the war
- the 3am phone call
- Obama hope
- Red States for The Messiah Blue for Hillary
- Jack Nicholson
- Obama change
- ► February (3)
- ▼ June (10)