“In Texas, Obama’s camp says it is not worrying about the national security debate.” Huh? Is this really true? I thought he put out an ad that indicated he had the better judgement? Is this a direct quote, or those guys still freezing you out of the their camp?

Here’s politics at it’s best! Obama realizes his muslim background could be a problem so he goes on the offensive before the General Elections. He has one of his people put out a photo of Obama in traditional garb knowing Hillary will be blamed. It not only negatively impacts Hillary but limits McCains ability to point out Obama’s tolerance of the radical Islamic movement.

As much as I dislike Obama and the Democrats overall, I must admit they are way better at damage control. I thinks in large part, it’s due to the nievity of the youth movement over there but never the less, it’s effective and deserves recognition.

When Hillary cleans house this Tuesday, will FOX and the rest of the media celebrate her victory. Will the media make comments like “Obama is in trouble now”, “It looks like Hillary can win this after all’, “This could spell the end for Obama”, or how about “We were wrong”. More likely, FOX will continue on the current path of getting Hillary at all cost. Why such hate? “Fair and balanced”, “no spin”, what a crock!

I would rather have a capable policy wonk (Clinton) in the White House than an evangelical preacher with several years of Senate experience. I still can’t believe that the American herd is rallying around nonsense like, “We are the ones that we have been waiting for.” Really, what the heck does that mean? People wake up! That statement is so self-referential, solipsistic, and deifies the chosen (like the Nazis did) to such an extent that it CONTRADICTS the major tenets of every religion that reminds human beings to find a higher standard outside of themselves and their own self-absorption. Can someone explain why people scream, tremble and cry over a charismatic personality whose self-indulgent mantras are found on the boxes of Celestial Seasoning tea boxes? Good Lord, and we wonder why the rest of the world laughs at us….

GO HILLARY !!!!!

Keep up the Good Fight!!! You Can Win – Yes YOU Can!!
Vote Hillary Clinton – She can save our country

GO HILLARY !!!!

I would rather have a capable policy wonk (Clinton) in the White House than an evangelical preacher with several years of Senate experience. I still can’t believe that the American herd is rallying around nonsense like, “We are the ones that we have been waiting for.” Really, what the heck does that mean? Imagine if the subject pronoun was changed — “I am the one that I have been waiting for.” Yeah, let me call the shrink and get you back on your meds…People wake up! That statement is so self-referential, solipsistic, and deifies the chosen (like the Nazis did) to such an extent that it CONTRADICTS the major tenets of every religion that remind human beings to find a higher standard outside of themselves and their own self-absorption. Can someone explain why people scream, tremble and cry over a charismatic personality whose self-indulgent mantras are found on Celestial Seasoning herbal tea boxes? Good Lord, and we wonder why the rest of the world laughs at us….

NEW Youtube Video!
NAFTA, McCain, Clinton and Change:

Hillary Clinton’s No. 1 Issue:

CHANGE from “20th Century Bimbo-eruption Warden” to “21st Century Bimbo-eruption Warden.”

GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAJYMgX4JuU
Obama and NAFTA
thanks for the link,,,,,Obama is f,,,liar,,,,,,

On the issue of experience, Obama`s record/experience is a joke by comparison…Hillary`s been to no less than 80 countries…helping any way she could…in addition, here`s just some of All Hillary`s achievements/experiences as a US Senator:
In 2000, Hillary was elected to the United States Senate from New York. As Senator, Hillary has continued her advocacy for children and families and has been a national leader on homeland security and national security issues.
After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Hillary worked with her colleagues to secure the funds New York needed to recover and rebuild. She fought to provide compensation to the families of the victims, grants for hard-hit small businesses, and health care for front line workers at Ground Zero. And she continues to work for resources that enable New York to grow, to improve homeland security for New York and other communities, and to protect all Americans from future attacks.
She is the first New Yorker ever to serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee, working to see that America’s military has the necessary resources to protect our national security. She has visited troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and at Fort Drum in New York, home of the 10th Mountain Division and other New York bases, as well as at Walter Reed Military Hospital. She has learned first-hand the challenges facing American combat forces. Hillary passed legislation to track the health status of our troops so that conditions like Gulf War Syndrome would no longer be misdiagnosed. She is an original sponsor of legislation that expanded health benefits to members of the National Guard and Reserves and has been a strong critic of the Administration’s handling of Iraq.
But Hillary has recognized that we can’t ignore our problems at home while we face challenges overseas. She has introduced legislation to tie Congressional salary increases to an increase in the minimum wage, because she believes if America’s working people don’t deserve a raise, neither does Congress. She has supported a variety of middle-class tax cuts, including marriage penalty relief, property tax relief, and reduction in the Alternative Minimum Tax, and supports fiscally responsible pay-as-you-go budget rules. She helped pass legislation that encouraged investment to create jobs in struggling communities through the Renewal Communities program. She has championed legislation to bring broadband Internet access, which is so important in today’s information economy, to rural America.
In the Senate, Hillary has not wavered in her work to expand quality affordable health care to more Americans. She worked to strengthen the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which increased coverage for children in low income and working families. She authored legislation that has been enacted to improve quality and lower the cost of prescription drugs and to protect our food supply from bioterrorism. She sponsored legislation to increase America’s commitment to fighting the global HIV/AIDS crisis, and is now leading the fight for expanded use of information technology in the health care system to decrease administrative costs, lower premiums, and reduce medical errors.
Her strong advocacy for children continues in the Senate. Some of Hillary’s proudest achievements have been her work to ensure the safety of prescription drugs for children, with legislation now included in the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, and her legislation to help schools address environmental hazards. She has also proposed expanding access to child care. She has passed legislation that will bring more qualified teachers into classrooms and more outstanding principals to lead our schools.
Hillary has been a powerful advocate for women in the Senate. Her commitment to supporting the rights guaranteed in Roe v. Wade and to reducing the number of abortions by reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies was hailed by the New York Times as “frank talk…(and) a promising path.” Hillary is one of the original cosponsors of the Prevention First Act to increase access to family planning. Her fight with the Bush Administration ensured that Plan B, an emergency contraceptive, will be available to millions of American women and will reduce the need for abortions.
Hillary is strongly committed to making sure that every American has the right to vote in fair, accessible, and credible elections. She introduced the Count Every Vote Act of 2005 to ensure better protection of votes and to ensure that every vote is counted.
In 2006, New Yorkers reelected Hillary to the Senate with 67 percent of the vote.
to begin with, in last week`s debate, there was the great ignorance Obama showed to the world when he told that story about the platoon, etc…displaying a great lack of knowledge about how the military is structured, etc…
in the last debate, he stated that he`d take action in Iraq…if intel indicated that Al-Quaeda was building a base there, etc., there…what?…wait a min?…this from a guy who stated that he was against the war from the start…
when the war started, the US had intel which indicated that Al-Quaeda had bases in Iraq…the very same condition which Obama states he`d take action over there…just like Bush did…
which means Obama was either LYING in the last debate or when he says he was against the war from the start.
btw, Hillary showed her superior experience, etc., by correctly answering this question…because a good Commander-in-Chief needs to know the facts before answering such questions…
she was also correct in pointing out that Obama wasn`t in the Sen. at the start to vote on the war…and he`s going to say what ever makes him look good…so, of course he`s going to LIE and say that he was against the war from the start…makes him look smarter than everyone else…especially to his followers…
and speeches, etc., aren`t the same…there`s a HUGE difference between giving speeches, etc., and voting with a constituency to answer to, nearly all of who were for the war at the time…
in fact, on and just after 9/11, very nearly every American, including Obama, was for going to war or dropping a bomb on who ever was responsible for what took place on 9/11…especially NYer`s…anyone who says differently is lying just like Obama is…as SHOWN above…
quite simply, Today`s world is too dangerous for a Pres. to be learning on the job…and openly negotiating without pre-conditions…with our enemies/terrorists…many of who HOPE every American drops dead this very moment…and would CHANGE the United States to something other than democracy…to think otherwise, like Obama, is extremely naive.

The more I read about Obama, the more fearful I become. His record of drugs, association with criminals, the radical black only church and dirty politics. The worldwide support of every muslim group in the world with money and endorsement. Louis Farrakhan, with his Nation of Isalm is a real concern and Obama’s church endorsed him. Obama is not presidential material. His black only mentality is very troublesome and not right for our country. Both Obama and his wife received Ivy League education through affirmative action, but now they are finally proud of our country. Neither of the Obama’s had the grades or finance for the Ivy League college education, but the taxpayer got stuck with the huge expense. Don’t you get that warm and fuzzy feeling regarding the Obama’s. I didn’t use his middle name.
Thank God! People have snapped out of this trance, we want Hillary to stay in the race until Obama’s laundry all airs out…. and as you will find…there is just as much enthusiasm in learning about his faults and laundry that the media “especially” that media machine that CNN has exposed as to what I call a Hillary CNN Bashing Machine… CNN led to this unevenness in race and the truths of a real democratic race itself. I believe whether or not if you are a Christian or not, you should specifically make sure what the core beliefs of your church are…and I’m not into an all black belief based church that Obama represents. I want a church that believes for my core beliefs as well, especially if they are going to be president.. WAIT A MINUTE – Don’t forget they haven’t even got into the Rezko story yet,,,That starts March 3rd,,,,, however in the past week you have seen some good Obama Bashing and WELL DESERVED after all the Hillary bashing. They believe pretty much the same things but experience prevails as to who can accomplish what CAST YOUR VOT FOR HILLARY – THE CLINTON DAYS BROUGHT PROSPERITY TO ALL>>>>>>>>>>>>>

RIGHT ON TO BOYCOTTING CNN
However, it should be until the November elections, what do you really get from them but constant negative coverage against only one FEMALE PERSON Hillary R. Clinton.
SHAME ON YOU, CNN YOU HAVE FALLEN FROM GRACE
SHAME ON YOU, CNN FOR BEING BIAS
SHAME ON YOU, CNN FOR NOT BEING A GENUINE NEWS CHANNEL
SHAME ON YOU, CNN FOR BEING ANTI-IMIGRANTS FROM MEXICO
SHAME ON YOU CNN, FOR BEING THE BEST “Barack Hussein Obama’s” POLITICAL TEAM

CAST YOUR VOT FOR HILLARY – THE CLINTON DAYS BROUGHT PROSPERITY TO ALL>>>>>>>>>>>>>

RIGHT ON TO BOYCOTTING CNN
However, it should be until the November elections, what do you really get from them but constant negative coverage against only one FEMALE PERSON Hillary R. Clinton.
SHAME ON YOU, CNN YOU HAVE FALLEN FROM GRACE
SHAME ON YOU, CNN FOR BEING BIAS
SHAME ON YOU, CNN FOR NOT BEING A GENUINE NEWS CHANNEL
SHAME ON YOU, CNN FOR BEING ANTI-IMIGRANTS FROM MEXICO
SHAME ON YOU CNN, FOR BEING THE BEST “Barack Hussein Obama’s” POLITICAL TEAM

Looking from the outside in, President Bill Clinton was the best President the USA had in the last 20 years. Now you have the worst in history in George Bush.
Hillary in every debate has answered her questions clearly and in detail while Obama just sits there and responds with ‘ I agree with Hillary and furthermore…”. This is enough proof that demonstrates he is definitely not cut out for the job.
The media gave Hillary a rough ride. The media keeps throwing out these obscure polls where this demographic here is gaining for Obama here and another obscure poll the media throws out thats says Obama that…so what’s up with the media ?
Obama says too he wants to go and talk with the US adversaries with no preconditions. Absurd !! Why is anybody even buying into this guy’s jive talk ?
I want to add too that this is the worst and most biased media coverage of a primary and Presidential election I’ve ever seen. I challenge anyone to prove I’m wrong. I’ve been proven right in these political matters 9 times out of 10 and I’m sure I’m right now.
Obama or McCain as President will be a very bad thing for the USA.
Obama has a history of ruthless and dirty politics: From a story about how he first gained public office in the Illinois State Senate: (Chicago Tribune April 4, 2007): The day after New Year’s 1996, operatives for Barack Obama filed into a barren hearing room of the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners. There they began the tedious process of challenging hundreds of signatures on the nominating petitions of state Sen. Alice Palmer, the longtime progressive activist from the city’s South Side. And they kept challenging petitions until every one of Obama’s four Democratic primary rivals was forced off the ballot. His overwhelming legal onslaught signaled his impatience to gain office, even if that meant elbowing aside an elder stateswoman like Palmer. A close examination of Obama’s first campaign clouds the image he has cultivated throughout his political career: The man now running for president on a message of giving a voice to the voiceless first entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by clearing it. One of the candidates he eliminated, long-shot contender Gha-is Askia, now says that Obama’s petition challenges belied his image as a champion of the little guy and crusader for voter rights. “He talks about honor and democracy, but what honor is there in getting rid of every other candidate so you can run scot-free? Why not let the people decide?” Had Palmer survived the petition challenge, Obama would have faced the daunting task of taking on an incumbent senator. Palmer’s elimination marked the first of several fortuitous political moments in Obama’s electoral success: He won the 2004 primary and general elections for U.S. Senate after tough challengers imploded when their messy divorce files were unsealed. Hence, his rapid ascent to power…
I absolutely have to disagree with this. The highlights that you have mentioned are two that yes, should be commended – however is record IS subject to much dispute concerning the times in which he has chosen, consciously NOT to vote on imperative issues within the Senate.
For instance: In 1999 Senator Obama was faced with an extremely difficult vote in the Illinois legislature, a bill which would allow Juveniles to be tried as adults. This had massive implications for African Americans and the potential to cause great controversy within that group.
VOTE: Neither yes or no. He voted ‘Present’ – effectively meaning he side stepped the issue.
130 OTHER times he took this stance within the Senate. On this note, when you state that you are shocked at the cries of millions of Americans who state that Obama lacks substance, on this issue who can really dispute this notion?
Although voting ‘present; is not unusual – it does raise the fundamental premise on which his campaign had been founded upon: he has tried to distinguish himself from Senator Clinton as a somebody who is ready to lead, who does despite popular belief, have the experience and tenacity with which to lead this incredibly bruised country.
He has not however, proved through this 130 – Present – record – that he can take on the tough issues – the issues which will undoubtedly face him on ‘Day One’ and shape the lives of the American people – if they issues present a hard line or a hard truth that people might not want to digest.
His record reflects also something else – at least 36 times Senator Obama was the ONLY state senator to vote present or was part of a tiny minority (5/6).
This is clearly with motive as opposed to being mindful of the issues at hand – his present votes stood out amongst widespread support because he has admittedly confessed to use them to register objections to part of the Bill – an act which you do, if you are mindful of running the risk of saying ‘No’. It clearly gives him political cover.
So I ask you – is this transparency…..
No….it really is more of the same. Washington Politics at its finest….
No ‘Change’ there then – a term he has so often brandished and banded around to fit his rhetoric….this time Senator Obama, I am certainly not falling for it. I hope to goodness the American people follow the lead.
Hopefully, CNN watched SNL last night. The Clinton/Obama debate
skit spoke volumes. CNN is bias in favor of Obama.
I can’t tell the difference between watching the FOX network from
CNN or any other of the major networks.
ALL our media sources suffer from Obamania!
Thankfully, SNL nailed it!
I hope CNN tries to regain some objectivity.

First of all Obama voted for NAFTA himself in 2004 and if people especially you young voters would stop following the media; Have you ever stopped and thought that the younger generation has grown up to be media kids, meaning in a lot of instances they vote for what the media represents as the going thing – like “Obama” without even researching all the facts. Simply amazing.

Hillary won that debate in Texas and Ohio, Obama got to study… and stumble his way through the whole thing and got to respond to Hillary’s thoughts before he spoke…HMMM and you wonder why Hillary questioned why did she haven’t to go first…hmm…probably because again, the media gave him chances to respond – he looked like Hillary’s Secretary, not a Presidential Leader – Get real,,,,,,,,,,,,She roped him, hands down and HELLO TEXAS AND OHIO DON”T BE BOUGHT BY THE MEDIA!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama has a history of ruthless and dirty politics: From a story about how he first gained public office in the Illinois State Senate: (Chicago Tribune April 4, 2007): The day after New Year’s 1996, operatives for Barack Obama filed into a barren hearing room of the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners. There they began the tedious process of challenging hundreds of signatures on the nominating petitions of state Sen. Alice Palmer, the longtime progressive activist from the city’s South Side. And they kept challenging petitions until every one of Obama’s four Democratic primary rivals was forced off the ballot. His overwhelming legal onslaught signaled his impatience to gain office, even if that meant elbowing aside an elder stateswoman like Palmer. A close examination of Obama’s first campaign clouds the image he has cultivated throughout his political career: The man now running for president on a message of giving a voice to the voiceless first entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by clearing it. One of the candidates he eliminated, long-shot contender Gha-is Askia, now says that Obama’s petition challenges belied his image as a champion of the little guy and crusader for voter rights. “He talks about honor and democracy, but what honor is there in getting rid of every other candidate so you can run scot-free? Why not let the people decide?” Had Palmer survived the petition challenge, Obama would have faced the daunting task of taking on an incumbent senator. Palmer’s elimination marked the first of several fortuitous political moments in Obama’s electoral success: He won the 2004 primary and general elections for U.S. Senate after tough challengers imploded when their messy divorce files were unsealed. Hence, his rapid ascent to power…
I absolutely have to disagree with this. The highlights that you have mentioned are two that yes, should be commended – however is record IS subject to much dispute concerning the times in which he has chosen, consciously NOT to vote on imperative issues within the Senate.
For instance: In 1999 Senator Obama was faced with an extremely difficult vote in the Illinois legislature, a bill which would allow Juveniles to be tried as adults. This had massive implications for African Americans and the potential to cause great controversy within that group.
VOTE: Neither yes or no. He voted ‘Present’ – effectively meaning he side stepped the issue.
130 OTHER times he took this stance within the Senate. On this note, when you state that you are shocked at the cries of millions of Americans who state that Obama lacks substance, on this issue who can really dispute this notion?
Although voting ‘present; is not unusual – it does raise the fundamental premise on which his campaign had been founded upon: he has tried to distinguish himself from Senator Clinton as a somebody who is ready to lead, who does despite popular belief, have the experience and tenacity with which to lead this incredibly bruised country.
He has not however, proved through this 130 – Present – record – that he can take on the tough issues – the issues which will undoubtedly face him on ‘Day One’ and shape the lives of the American people – if they issues present a hard line or a hard truth that people might not want to digest.
His record reflects also something else – at least 36 times Senator Obama was the ONLY state senator to vote present or was part of a tiny minority (5/6).
This is clearly with motive as opposed to being mindful of the issues at hand – his present votes stood out amongst widespread support because he has admittedly confessed to use them to register objections to part of the Bill – an act which you do, if you are mindful of running the risk of saying ‘No’. It clearly gives him political cover.
So I ask you – is this transparency…..
No….it really is more of the same. Washington Politics at its finest….
No ‘Change’ there then – a term he has so often brandished and banded around to fit his rhetoric….this time Senator Obama, I am certainly not falling for it. I hope to goodness the American people follow the lead.
Hopefully, CNN watched SNL last night. The Clinton/Obama debate
skit spoke volumes. CNN is bias in favor of Obama.
I can’t tell the difference between watching the FOX network from
CNN or any other of the major networks.
ALL our media sources suffer from Obamania!
Thankfully, SNL nailed it!
I hope CNN tries to regain some objectivity.

YOU GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Obama supports the upper-middle class, not the poor, average Americans searching for HOPE, you must be able to see through all these nice spoken words………………..
It’s amazing to me that people are voting for “Obama” someone that does not follow our country’s traditions, no hand during the pledge, “a Muslim past”. It’s kind of scary to see how someone can give such wonderful speeches and the media can be so biased of Hillary and he gets a free ride with free media coverage, just crazy… he’s a dreamer without any substance and HOPE is not going to change this country’s direction based on WORDS.

GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

“Obama, Clinton Donating Heavily to Superdelegates’ Campaigns
by Associated Press
Thursday, February 14, 2008
The study tracked donations received by members of Congress from the candidates’ leadership PACs and from their candidate committees. It tracked donations made to governors by examining the presidential candidates’ expenditures.
Among the findings:
— Since 2005, Obama’s committees gave $228,000 to superdelegates who have endorsed him, $363,900 to those who were still undecided, and $102,400 to those who have endorsed Clinton.
–Clinton’s committee’s gave $95,000 to superdelegates who have endorsed her, $88,000 to those who
were still neutral, and $12,500 to those who have endorsed Obama.

Email Misrepresents Hillary’s Legislative Record
There is an email circulating that grossly misrepresents Hillary’s legislative record, as well as the record of Sen. Obama. (Various versions appear on the Obama campaign website here, here, and here.)
The email only gives Hillary credit for bills where she was the original sponsor and have also been signed into law. Here are the facts. In her time in the Senate, Hillary has sponsored 21 bills that have become law including:
— a bill that extended the availability of unemployment assistance.
— a bill which established a program to assist family caregivers.
— a bill that provided benefits to public safety officers who were killed or injured during the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
But Hillary’s accomplishments in the Senate are not limited to bill sponsorships. Among her many other legislative accomplishments:
— Hillary worked with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to expand access to health care for the National Guard and Reserve.
— Hillary passed an amendment that created a national program for teacher and principal training and recruitment.
— Hillary used Senate rules to force the Bush administration to make emergency contraception, also known as Plan B, available over the counter.
Meanwhile, the email gives Sen. Obama credit for every bill he introduced or signed on as a co-sponsor, whether or not they became law. The reality is, since Sen. Obama joined the Senate (applying the same standard the email applies to Hillary) he has sponsored two bills that have become law:
— a bill that sought to promote democracy in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
— a bill that named a post office.

GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! READ ALL THE FACTS AND MAKE REAL CHOICES!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAJYMgX4JuU
Obama and NAFTA
thanks for the link,,,,,Obama is f,,,liar,,,,,,

On the issue of experience, Obama`s record/experience is a joke by comparison…Hillary`s been to no less than 80 countries…helping any way she could…in addition, here`s just some of All Hillary`s achievements/experiences as a US Senator:
In 2000, Hillary was elected to the United States Senate from New York. As Senator, Hillary has continued her advocacy for children and families and has been a national leader on homeland security and national security issues.
After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Hillary worked with her colleagues to secure the funds New York needed to recover and rebuild. She fought to provide compensation to the families of the victims, grants for hard-hit small businesses, and health care for front line workers at Ground Zero. And she continues to work for resources that enable New York to grow, to improve homeland security for New York and other communities, and to protect all Americans from future attacks.
She is the first New Yorker ever to serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee, working to see that America’s military has the necessary resources to protect our national security. She has visited troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and at Fort Drum in New York, home of the 10th Mountain Division and other New York bases, as well as at Walter Reed Military Hospital. She has learned first-hand the challenges facing American combat forces. Hillary passed legislation to track the health status of our troops so that conditions like Gulf War Syndrome would no longer be misdiagnosed. She is an original sponsor of legislation that expanded health benefits to members of the National Guard and Reserves and has been a strong critic of the Administration’s handling of Iraq.
But Hillary has recognized that we can’t ignore our problems at home while we face challenges overseas. She has introduced legislation to tie Congressional salary increases to an increase in the minimum wage, because she believes if America’s working people don’t deserve a raise, neither does Congress. She has supported a variety of middle-class tax cuts, including marriage penalty relief, property tax relief, and reduction in the Alternative Minimum Tax, and supports fiscally responsible pay-as-you-go budget rules. She helped pass legislation that encouraged investment to create jobs in struggling communities through the Renewal Communities program. She has championed legislation to bring broadband Internet access, which is so important in today’s information economy, to rural America.
In the Senate, Hillary has not wavered in her work to expand quality affordable health care to more Americans. She worked to strengthen the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which increased coverage for children in low income and working families. She authored legislation that has been enacted to improve quality and lower the cost of prescription drugs and to protect our food supply from bioterrorism. She sponsored legislation to increase America’s commitment to fighting the global HIV/AIDS crisis, and is now leading the fight for expanded use of information technology in the health care system to decrease administrative costs, lower premiums, and reduce medical errors.
Her strong advocacy for children continues in the Senate. Some of Hillary’s proudest achievements have been her work to ensure the safety of prescription drugs for children, with legislation now included in the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, and her legislation to help schools address environmental hazards. She has also proposed expanding access to child care. She has passed legislation that will bring more qualified teachers into classrooms and more outstanding principals to lead our schools.
Hillary has been a powerful advocate for women in the Senate. Her commitment to supporting the rights guaranteed in Roe v. Wade and to reducing the number of abortions by reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies was hailed by the New York Times as “frank talk…(and) a promising path.” Hillary is one of the original cosponsors of the Prevention First Act to increase access to family planning. Her fight with the Bush Administration ensured that Plan B, an emergency contraceptive, will be available to millions of American women and will reduce the need for abortions.
Hillary is strongly committed to making sure that every American has the right to vote in fair, accessible, and credible elections. She introduced the Count Every Vote Act of 2005 to ensure better protection of votes and to ensure that every vote is counted.
In 2006, New Yorkers reelected Hillary to the Senate with 67 percent of the vote.
to begin with, in last week`s debate, there was the great ignorance Obama showed to the world when he told that story about the platoon, etc…displaying a great lack of knowledge about how the military is structured, etc…
in the last debate, he stated that he`d take action in Iraq…if intel indicated that Al-Quaeda was building a base there, etc., there…what?…wait a min?…this from a guy who stated that he was against the war from the start…
when the war started, the US had intel which indicated that Al-Quaeda had bases in Iraq…the very same condition which Obama states he`d take action over there…just like Bush did…
which means Obama was either LYING in the last debate or when he says he was against the war from the start.
btw, Hillary showed her superior experience, etc., by correctly answering this question…because a good Commander-in-Chief needs to know the facts before answering such questions…
she was also correct in pointing out that Obama wasn`t in the Sen. at the start to vote on the war…and he`s going to say what ever makes him look good…so, of course he`s going to LIE and say that he was against the war from the start…makes him look smarter than everyone else…especially to his followers…
and speeches, etc., aren`t the same…there`s a HUGE difference between giving speeches, etc., and voting with a constituency to answer to, nearly all of who were for the war at the time…
in fact, on and just after 9/11, very nearly every American, including Obama, was for going to war or dropping a bomb on who ever was responsible for what took place on 9/11…especially NYer`s…anyone who says differently is lying just like Obama is…as SHOWN above…
quite simply, Today`s world is too dangerous for a Pres. to be learning on the job…and openly negotiating without pre-conditions…with our enemies/terrorists…many of who HOPE every American drops dead this very moment…and would CHANGE the United States to something other than democracy…to think otherwise, like Obama, is extremely naive.

The more I read about Obama, the more fearful I become. His record of drugs, association with criminals, the radical black only church and dirty politics. The worldwide support of every muslim group in the world with money and endorsement. Louis Farrakhan, with his Nation of Isalm is a real concern and Obama’s church endorsed him. Obama is not presidential material. His black only mentality is very troublesome and not right for our country. Both Obama and his wife received Ivy League education through affirmative action, but now they are finally proud of our country. Neither of the Obama’s had the grades or finance for the Ivy League college education, but the taxpayer got stuck with the huge expense. Don’t you get that warm and fuzzy feeling regarding the Obama’s. I didn’t use his middle name.
Thank God! People have snapped out of this trance, we want Hillary to stay in the race until Obama’s laundry all airs out…. and as you will find…there is just as much enthusiasm in learning about his faults and laundry that the media “especially” that media machine that CNN has exposed as to what I call a Hillary CNN Bashing Machine… CNN led to this unevenness in race and the truths of a real democratic race itself. I believe whether or not if you are a Christian or not, you should specifically make sure what the core beliefs of your church are…and I’m not into an all black belief based church that Obama represents. I want a church that believes for my core beliefs as well, especially if they are going to be president.. WAIT A MINUTE – Don’t forget they haven’t even got into the Rezko story yet,,,That starts March 3rd,,,,, however in the past week you have seen some good Obama Bashing and WELL DESERVED after all the Hillary bashing. They believe pretty much the same things but experience prevails as to who can accomplish what CAST YOUR VOT FOR HILLARY – THE CLINTON DAYS BROUGHT PROSPERITY TO ALL>>>>>>>>>>>>>

RIGHT ON TO BOYCOTTING CNN
However, it should be until the November elections, what do you really get from them but constant negative coverage against only one FEMALE PERSON Hillary R. Clinton.
SHAME ON YOU, CNN YOU HAVE FALLEN FROM GRACE
SHAME ON YOU, CNN FOR BEING BIAS
SHAME ON YOU, CNN FOR NOT BEING A GENUINE NEWS CHANNEL
SHAME ON YOU, CNN FOR BEING ANTI-IMIGRANTS FROM MEXICO
SHAME ON YOU CNN, FOR BEING THE BEST “Barack Hussein Obama’s” POLITICAL TEAM

CAST YOUR VOT FOR HILLARY – THE CLINTON DAYS BROUGHT PROSPERITY TO ALL>>>>>>>>>>>>>

RIGHT ON TO BOYCOTTING CNN
However, it should be until the November elections, what do you really get from them but constant negative coverage against only one FEMALE PERSON Hillary R. Clinton.
SHAME ON YOU, CNN YOU HAVE FALLEN FROM GRACE
SHAME ON YOU, CNN FOR BEING BIAS
SHAME ON YOU, CNN FOR NOT BEING A GENUINE NEWS CHANNEL
SHAME ON YOU, CNN FOR BEING ANTI-IMIGRANTS FROM MEXICO
SHAME ON YOU CNN, FOR BEING THE BEST “Barack Hussein Obama’s” POLITICAL TEAM

Looking from the outside in, President Bill Clinton was the best President the USA had in the last 20 years. Now you have the worst in history in George Bush.
Hillary in every debate has answered her questions clearly and in detail while Obama just sits there and responds with ‘ I agree with Hillary and furthermore…”. This is enough proof that demonstrates he is definitely not cut out for the job.
The media gave Hillary a rough ride. The media keeps throwing out these obscure polls where this demographic here is gaining for Obama here and another obscure poll the media throws out thats says Obama that…so what’s up with the media ?
Obama says too he wants to go and talk with the US adversaries with no preconditions. Absurd !! Why is anybody even buying into this guy’s jive talk ?
I want to add too that this is the worst and most biased media coverage of a primary and Presidential election I’ve ever seen. I challenge anyone to prove I’m wrong. I’ve been proven right in these political matters 9 times out of 10 and I’m sure I’m right now.
Obama or McCain as President will be a very bad thing for the USA.
Obama has a history of ruthless and dirty politics: From a story about how he first gained public office in the Illinois State Senate: (Chicago Tribune April 4, 2007): The day after New Year’s 1996, operatives for Barack Obama filed into a barren hearing room of the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners. There they began the tedious process of challenging hundreds of signatures on the nominating petitions of state Sen. Alice Palmer, the longtime progressive activist from the city’s South Side. And they kept challenging petitions until every one of Obama’s four Democratic primary rivals was forced off the ballot. His overwhelming legal onslaught signaled his impatience to gain office, even if that meant elbowing aside an elder stateswoman like Palmer. A close examination of Obama’s first campaign clouds the image he has cultivated throughout his political career: The man now running for president on a message of giving a voice to the voiceless first entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by clearing it. One of the candidates he eliminated, long-shot contender Gha-is Askia, now says that Obama’s petition challenges belied his image as a champion of the little guy and crusader for voter rights. “He talks about honor and democracy, but what honor is there in getting rid of every other candidate so you can run scot-free? Why not let the people decide?” Had Palmer survived the petition challenge, Obama would have faced the daunting task of taking on an incumbent senator. Palmer’s elimination marked the first of several fortuitous political moments in Obama’s electoral success: He won the 2004 primary and general elections for U.S. Senate after tough challengers imploded when their messy divorce files were unsealed. Hence, his rapid ascent to power…
I absolutely have to disagree with this. The highlights that you have mentioned are two that yes, should be commended – however is record IS subject to much dispute concerning the times in which he has chosen, consciously NOT to vote on imperative issues within the Senate.
For instance: In 1999 Senator Obama was faced with an extremely difficult vote in the Illinois legislature, a bill which would allow Juveniles to be tried as adults. This had massive implications for African Americans and the potential to cause great controversy within that group.
VOTE: Neither yes or no. He voted ‘Present’ – effectively meaning he side stepped the issue.
130 OTHER times he took this stance within the Senate. On this note, when you state that you are shocked at the cries of millions of Americans who state that Obama lacks substance, on this issue who can really dispute this notion?
Although voting ‘present; is not unusual – it does raise the fundamental premise on which his campaign had been founded upon: he has tried to distinguish himself from Senator Clinton as a somebody who is ready to lead, who does despite popular belief, have the experience and tenacity with which to lead this incredibly bruised country.
He has not however, proved through this 130 – Present – record – that he can take on the tough issues – the issues which will undoubtedly face him on ‘Day One’ and shape the lives of the American people – if they issues present a hard line or a hard truth that people might not want to digest.
His record reflects also something else – at least 36 times Senator Obama was the ONLY state senator to vote present or was part of a tiny minority (5/6).
This is clearly with motive as opposed to being mindful of the issues at hand – his present votes stood out amongst widespread support because he has admittedly confessed to use them to register objections to part of the Bill – an act which you do, if you are mindful of running the risk of saying ‘No’. It clearly gives him political cover.
So I ask you – is this transparency…..
No….it really is more of the same. Washington Politics at its finest….
No ‘Change’ there then – a term he has so often brandished and banded around to fit his rhetoric….this time Senator Obama, I am certainly not falling for it. I hope to goodness the American people follow the lead.
Hopefully, CNN watched SNL last night. The Clinton/Obama debate
skit spoke volumes. CNN is bias in favor of Obama.
I can’t tell the difference between watching the FOX network from
CNN or any other of the major networks.
ALL our media sources suffer from Obamania!
Thankfully, SNL nailed it!
I hope CNN tries to regain some objectivity.

First of all Obama voted for NAFTA himself in 2004 and if people especially you young voters would stop following the media; Have you ever stopped and thought that the younger generation has grown up to be media kids, meaning in a lot of instances they vote for what the media represents as the going thing – like “Obama” without even researching all the facts. Simply amazing.

Hillary won that debate in Texas and Ohio, Obama got to study… and stumble his way through the whole thing and got to respond to Hillary’s thoughts before he spoke…HMMM and you wonder why Hillary questioned why did she haven’t to go first…hmm…probably because again, the media gave him chances to respond – he looked like Hillary’s Secretary, not a Presidential Leader – Get real,,,,,,,,,,,,She roped him, hands down and HELLO TEXAS AND OHIO DON”T BE BOUGHT BY THE MEDIA!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama has a history of ruthless and dirty politics: From a story about how he first gained public office in the Illinois State Senate: (Chicago Tribune April 4, 2007): The day after New Year’s 1996, operatives for Barack Obama filed into a barren hearing room of the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners. There they began the tedious process of challenging hundreds of signatures on the nominating petitions of state Sen. Alice Palmer, the longtime progressive activist from the city’s South Side. And they kept challenging petitions until every one of Obama’s four Democratic primary rivals was forced off the ballot. His overwhelming legal onslaught signaled his impatience to gain office, even if that meant elbowing aside an elder stateswoman like Palmer. A close examination of Obama’s first campaign clouds the image he has cultivated throughout his political career: The man now running for president on a message of giving a voice to the voiceless first entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by clearing it. One of the candidates he eliminated, long-shot contender Gha-is Askia, now says that Obama’s petition challenges belied his image as a champion of the little guy and crusader for voter rights. “He talks about honor and democracy, but what honor is there in getting rid of every other candidate so you can run scot-free? Why not let the people decide?” Had Palmer survived the petition challenge, Obama would have faced the daunting task of taking on an incumbent senator. Palmer’s elimination marked the first of several fortuitous political moments in Obama’s electoral success: He won the 2004 primary and general elections for U.S. Senate after tough challengers imploded when their messy divorce files were unsealed. Hence, his rapid ascent to power…
I absolutely have to disagree with this. The highlights that you have mentioned are two that yes, should be commended – however is record IS subject to much dispute concerning the times in which he has chosen, consciously NOT to vote on imperative issues within the Senate.
For instance: In 1999 Senator Obama was faced with an extremely difficult vote in the Illinois legislature, a bill which would allow Juveniles to be tried as adults. This had massive implications for African Americans and the potential to cause great controversy within that group.
VOTE: Neither yes or no. He voted ‘Present’ – effectively meaning he side stepped the issue.
130 OTHER times he took this stance within the Senate. On this note, when you state that you are shocked at the cries of millions of Americans who state that Obama lacks substance, on this issue who can really dispute this notion?
Although voting ‘present; is not unusual – it does raise the fundamental premise on which his campaign had been founded upon: he has tried to distinguish himself from Senator Clinton as a somebody who is ready to lead, who does despite popular belief, have the experience and tenacity with which to lead this incredibly bruised country.
He has not however, proved through this 130 – Present – record – that he can take on the tough issues – the issues which will undoubtedly face him on ‘Day One’ and shape the lives of the American people – if they issues present a hard line or a hard truth that people might not want to digest.
His record reflects also something else – at least 36 times Senator Obama was the ONLY state senator to vote present or was part of a tiny minority (5/6).
This is clearly with motive as opposed to being mindful of the issues at hand – his present votes stood out amongst widespread support because he has admittedly confessed to use them to register objections to part of the Bill – an act which you do, if you are mindful of running the risk of saying ‘No’. It clearly gives him political cover.
So I ask you – is this transparency…..
No….it really is more of the same. Washington Politics at its finest….
No ‘Change’ there then – a term he has so often brandished and banded around to fit his rhetoric….this time Senator Obama, I am certainly not falling for it. I hope to goodness the American people follow the lead.
Hopefully, CNN watched SNL last night. The Clinton/Obama debate
skit spoke volumes. CNN is bias in favor of Obama.
I can’t tell the difference between watching the FOX network from
CNN or any other of the major networks.
ALL our media sources suffer from Obamania!
Thankfully, SNL nailed it!
I hope CNN tries to regain some objectivity.

YOU GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Obama supports the upper-middle class, not the poor, average Americans searching for HOPE, you must be able to see through all these nice spoken words………………..
It’s amazing to me that people are voting for “Obama” someone that does not follow our country’s traditions, no hand during the pledge, “a Muslim past”. It’s kind of scary to see how someone can give such wonderful speeches and the media can be so biased of Hillary and he gets a free ride with free media coverage, just crazy… he’s a dreamer without any substance and HOPE is not going to change this country’s direction based on WORDS.

GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

“Obama, Clinton Donating Heavily to Superdelegates’ Campaigns
by Associated Press
Thursday, February 14, 2008
The study tracked donations received by members of Congress from the candidates’ leadership PACs and from their candidate committees. It tracked donations made to governors by examining the presidential candidates’ expenditures.
Among the findings:
— Since 2005, Obama’s committees gave $228,000 to superdelegates who have endorsed him, $363,900 to those who were still undecided, and $102,400 to those who have endorsed Clinton.
–Clinton’s committee’s gave $95,000 to superdelegates who have endorsed her, $88,000 to those who
were still neutral, and $12,500 to those who have endorsed Obama.

Email Misrepresents Hillary’s Legislative Record
There is an email circulating that grossly misrepresents Hillary’s legislative record, as well as the record of Sen. Obama. (Various versions appear on the Obama campaign website here, here, and here.)
The email only gives Hillary credit for bills where she was the original sponsor and have also been signed into law. Here are the facts. In her time in the Senate, Hillary has sponsored 21 bills that have become law including:
— a bill that extended the availability of unemployment assistance.
— a bill which established a program to assist family caregivers.
— a bill that provided benefits to public safety officers who were killed or injured during the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
But Hillary’s accomplishments in the Senate are not limited to bill sponsorships. Among her many other legislative accomplishments:
— Hillary worked with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to expand access to health care for the National Guard and Reserve.
— Hillary passed an amendment that created a national program for teacher and principal training and recruitment.
— Hillary used Senate rules to force the Bush administration to make emergency contraception, also known as Plan B, available over the counter.
Meanwhile, the email gives Sen. Obama credit for every bill he introduced or signed on as a co-sponsor, whether or not they became law. The reality is, since Sen. Obama joined the Senate (applying the same standard the email applies to Hillary) he has sponsored two bills that have become law:
— a bill that sought to promote democracy in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
— a bill that named a post office.

“A muddled Super Tuesday Part 2 could send the campaign into a seven-week trek through Pennsylvania before its April 22 primary.”

Not only that, but a “muddled” result makes the possibility of the final decision being made by the super delegates more likely to occur.

If that happens, you then wonder what impact is will have on those who supported the loser.

This just might be the most entertaining election year ever!

It’s actually getting kinda sad to see Hillary grasping at political straws since, by now, she knows that she cannot possibly stop Obama in Texas or Ohio and most of the remaining states are very strong for Obama. As much as I dislike her and as completely unqualified as I think she is, as any kind of executive, I wish that she would simply stop and realize her situation and then leave the campaign with a tiny bit of grace.

Hillary is just addressing her comments to the interest of her audiences. As a public speaker I do the same without any hidden agendas and without running for office.

Hillary is cleaning O’s clock! However you wouldn’t know it by the press. If you listen to MSM you will believe that Obama is miles ahead of Hillary or McCain. In both cases he has been falling and Hillary and McCain rising in the polls the last week and a half.

Don’t buy into the lemmings and sheeple band wagon. Vote for Hillary in Texas y’all. Vote for Hillary in Ohio–You too!!!

GO HILLARY !!!!

Major Garrett – Are you being paid by the Obama campaign – or – does Fox News pay you to openly campaign for Obama????
Every time you are on air – you really do have a hard time saying a positive comment about Clinton – it is so obvious. We do not need or want your personal comments – just report the Facts – Fair & Balanced – We will decide – that is the Fox news slogan???
I will be so happy to hear your “opinion” on Tuesday night – after the next big race – Fox news is reporting that the polls show Obama & Clinton tied – that would mean SHE could win!!!!

GO HILLARY !!!!

obama has been doing this same thing the entire time and the media has protected him – now watch a big stink come her way for doing this – this is a one way road campaign, he has outspent her 2-1 , he is crying to stop florida and michigan from counting yet he wants all of thepeoples voices top be heard – give me a break – he is so self-serving in this campagin – people ar e so foolish to back him

Clinton ‘08

or McCain ‘08

It is not true that the issues change. The commercials change-as is true with Obama also!! Be fair!

Sen. Rockefeller (who Obama keeps saying was against the war) voted FOR the war – Obama needs to check his facts before he “talks”. And as far as his “judgment” goes – he sure didn’t excercise good judgment in his personal dealings with Rezko and Farrakhan – which I’m sure we will hear much more on. If his judgment is iffy on these dealings why in the world would ANYONE want to trust his judgment when it comes to our National Security.

His “judgment” on the war in 2002 was a judgment based not on the facts that were available at the time – facts that showed that there were WMD in Iraq (come on people – has it been that long that no-one remembers 9/11?). Hillary made a call based upon the information provided and with the safety of this country in her thoughts. Where was Obama’s thoughts? He had no way of knowing whether there were WMD – and he did not have to take responsibility for his decision because he was not in the Senate to vote. The “judgment” he expressed was for this country to NOT defend itself. THat is NOT good judgment in my opinion nor in many others.

Hillary is the clear choice for President and Commander-in-Chief as noted by the many Generals and Flag Officers that endorse her (shown below).

Generals & Flag Officers Endorsing Hillary Clinton for President and Commander-in-Chief

General Wesley Clark
General John M. Shalikashvili
General Johnnie E. Wilson
Admiral William Owens
Lt. Gen. Joe Ballard
Lt. Gen. Robert Gard
Lt. Gen. Claudia J. Kennedy
Lt. Gen. Donald L. Kerrick
Lt. Gen. Frederick E. Vollrath
Vice Admiral Joseph A. Sestak
Major General Roger R. Blunt
Major General George A. Buskirk, Jr.
Major General Edward L. Correa, Jr.
Major General Paul D. Eaton
Major General Paul D. Monroe, Jr.
Major General Antonio M. Taguba
Rear Admiral Connie Mariano
Rear Admiral Alan M. Steinman
Rear Admiral David Stone
Brigadier General Michael Dunn
Brigadier General Belisario Flores
Brigadier General Evelyn “Pat” Foote
Brigadier General Keith H. Kerr
Brigadier General Virgil A. Richard
Brigadier General Preston Taylor
Brigadier General John M. Watkins, Jr.
Brigadier General Jack Yeager

Take a look at what our so called next prez is known to do:
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=159248288&blogID=259712152&Mytoken=8738375F-A57E-4AB4-900496ABAA3F3FF11236719

The fact that Hil-Liar-y tells different stories in different parts of the country is not a surprize. To her, the end justifies any means that can be dreamed up. Therein lies the overpowering danger of having Hil-Liar-y in the Oval Office. Like Bill, logic is her real enemy and truth is just an everyday problem to be avoided.

IF CLINTON IS A CHAMPION OF WOMEN THEN WHY WILL SHE NOT REJECT AND DENOUNCE MONEY FROM COMPANY ACCUSED OF WIDESPREAD SEXUAL HARRASMENT

“Sen. Hillary Clinton has declined to return $170,000 in campaign contributions from individuals at a company accused of widespread sexual harassment, and whose CEO is a disbarred lawyer with a criminal record, federal campaign records show.

The federal government has accused the Illinois management consulting firm, International Profit Associates, or IPA, of a brazen pattern of sexual harassment including “sexual assaults,” “degrading anti-female language” and “obscene suggestions.”

In a 2001 lawsuit full of lurid details, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claims that 103 women employees at IPA were victimized for years. The civil case is ongoing, and IPA vigorously denies the allegations.

“This is by far, hands down, the worst case I’ve ever experienced,” said Diane Smason, one of the EEOC lawyers handling the lawsuit. “Every woman there experienced sex harassment, they were part of a hostile work environment of sex harassment. And this occurred from the top down.”

Sen. Clinton’s spokesman, Howard Wolfson, told NBC News in a statement that the senator decided to keep the funds because the lawsuit is “ongoing” and because none of the sexual harassment allegations has been proven in court.

“With regard to the pending harassment suit, as a general matter, the campaign assesses findings of fact in deciding whether to return contributions,” Wolfson said.”

From NBC’s Lisa Myers and Jim Popkin

I do not like his reporting on the Clinton

Hillary’s claim as a national security expert appears delusional. For the first time in american history, a former first lady is claiming that her experience as first lady makes her a national security expert. If so, then Laura Bush, Nancy Reagan and others should claim the same thing and run for the presidency. Unfortunately, she has shown she is a bad national security expert because she voted for a war that is based on lies.

Very interesting. Obama is a liar!!!! He is finally falling off his pedestal.

http://www.hillaryis44.com/

Is this report supposed to be news or opinion? If opinion, then, the bias needs to be stated – to be fair and balanced. There are some key loaded phrases used about Hilary Clinton e.g. “sparsely attended”. “rhetorical schitzophrenia” and “funereal air.” Interesting but value-laded phrases.

So you want to talk about NAFTA? NAFTA is to put it simply a bad deal all the way around for the American workers as well as the Canadian workers. Like the American workers we here in Canada have been losing high paying jobs by the thousands which are being replaced by low paying work for nothing jobs. To the American workers that have been hurt by NAFTA and are losing your jobs and homes each and everyday all I can say is that we here in Canada feel your pain because the same is happening here in Canada. If NAFTA doesn’t not work for the majority of workers then why do we as North American workers continue to let that so called great deal be shoved down our throats. Either make NAFTA fair or get rid of it.

The Empresses new cloths:

I want to know why everyone is so eager to accept without question Clinton’s claim to having the most experience.

What experience? Being a partner in the Rose law firm, completes of her husband being Governor of Arkansas? First Lady of Arkansas? First Lady of the U.S.???

One complete term in the Senate as the Senator from a state that was hand picked and a position that was scripted to put her as the nominee of this election?

Everyone accepts this as proof of her experience?

Anyone who accepts this fable will appreciate the tale of the Empresses new cloths…. you are all following her like lemmings and unable to see that she has no cloths at all.

Hillary needs to drop out!! The democrat party will be destroyed. The dirty tricks Hillary is playing and being rewarded only condones the dirtiness that the republicans did to Bill Clinton during his presidency.
This is not just fighting, this is knife, gun, cheating fighting when people and groups of people get hurt beyond repair.
Hillary’s not boxing on her own strength, but in creating a smoke screen, distracting the referee(media-”your picking on me”), putting chemicals on her gloves(Nafta, Canada, Roscoe) and then fighting. Barach is going to have no choice but to be dirty for good can prevail.

I think Hillary Clinton’s 3:00 a.m. ad was the factor in her win in Texas. It was an insult by some of the Fox News members that Texas was influenced by SNL. I think with a little investigation you will find that Texas had record numbers turn out for early voting. We in Texas make up our own minds and do not care what happens on SNL.

Hillary still shows she is still a dishonest person. When will she release her tax returns? I will say when the important states are out of the way. She is,and was, a liar and a phony. The people who vote for her should wakeup.

It’s 3:00 a.m. in the White House.

The upstairs phone rings. The President answers.

Hello….No, Bill is not here….

No, I don’t know where he is.

Who is this?….

No, I will not tell him Muffy called.

I thought Fox News was claiming to be non-biased and stop the Hillary bashing. I stopped watching CNN and MSNBC – is there not any media out there that can stop with the Hillary attacks?

Home The RCP Blog Polls Videos RCBlogs Transcripts Fantasy ‘08 Links About | Advertise News & Election Videos
Obama Interviews after Winning Mississippi
Pelossi Dismisses Possibility of Dream Ticket
Obama Derides the Clintons For Suggesting He Be VP
Spitzer Speaks about His Involvement With Prostitution Ring
More Political Videos
RCP Poll Averages
Democratic Presidential Nomination
RCP Average
Obama47.8%Clinton43.3%Obama +4.5%

General Election: McCain vs. Obama
RCP Average
McCain (R)42.3%Obama (D)47.5%Und9.0%Obama +5.2%

General Election: McCain vs. Clinton
RCP Average
McCain (R)46.0%Clinton (D)47.7%Clinton +1.7%

Obama wins Mississippi primary
Romney says he’d take Veep job
‘They’re attacking me because I’m white’
McCain manager: No more personal attacks
Don’t always stand by your man
The RCP Blog
Obama Wins Mississippi
Ferraro’s Monstrous Remarks
Congressional Vacancies Filling
PA Poll: Clinton +19
Gillibrand: No Choice For Spitzer
Latest Opinion
Is Obama Or Clinton The Better General Election Candidate?
Team Obama: Ready for Prime Time?
Don’t Let Spitzer Get Away with Being Called a Hypocrite
Torture Now a Campaign Issue
Culture Wars? How 2004.
Related Opinion
An Open Letter to the Candidates
Panel Analyzes Times/McCain Story
Questions For John McCain
Panel Discusses Clinton’s Superdelegate Defections
Clinton Has a Chance to the Right of Obama
Related Topics
clinton
election 2008
foreign policy
obama
Election 2008 Democrats | Republicans | General Election: Heads-to-Heads | Latest Polls

SEND TO A FRIEND | PRINT ARTICLE | Comments

——————————————————————————–
March 11, 2008
Senator Clinton’s Claims of Foreign Policy Experience Are Exaggerated
By Greg Craig

To: Interested Parties

From: Greg Craig, former director, Policy Planning Office, U.S. State Department

RE: Senator Clinton’s claim to be experienced in foreign policy: Just words?

DA: March 11, 2008

When your entire campaign is based upon a claim of experience, it is important that you have evidence to support that claim. Hillary Clinton’s argument that she has passed “the Commander- in-Chief test” is simply not supported by her record.

There is no doubt that Hillary Clinton played an important domestic policy role when she was First Lady. It is well known, for example, that she led the failed effort to pass universal health insurance. There is no reason to believe, however, that she was a key player in foreign policy at any time during the Clinton Administration. She did not sit in on National Security Council meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the Situation Room. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy, nor did she have her own national security staff. She did not do any heavy-lifting with foreign governments, whether they were friendly or not. She never managed a foreign policy crisis, and there is no evidence to suggest that she participated in the decision-making that occurred in connection with any such crisis. As far as the record shows, Senator Clinton never answered the phone either to make a decision on any pressing national security issue – not at 3 AM or at any other time of day.

When asked to describe her experience, Senator Clinton has cited a handful of international incidents where she says she played a central role. But any fair-minded and objective judge of these claims – i.e., by someone not affiliated with the Clinton campaign – would conclude that Senator Clinton’s claims of foreign policy experience are exaggerated.

Northern Ireland:

Senator Clinton has said, “I helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland.” It is a gross overstatement of the facts for her to claim even partial credit for bringing peace to Northern Ireland. She did travel to Northern Ireland, it is true. First Ladies often travel to places that are a focus of U.S. foreign policy. But at no time did she play any role in the critical negotiations that ultimately produced the peace. As the Associated Press recently reported, “[S]he was not directly involved in negotiating the Good Friday peace accord.” With regard to her main claim that she helped bring women together, she did participate in a meeting with women, but, according to those who know best, she did not play a pivotal role. The person in charge of the negotiations, former Senator George Mitchell, said that “[The First Lady] was one of many people who participated in encouraging women to get involved, not the only one.”

News of Senator Clinton’s claims has raised eyebrows across the ocean. Her reference to an important meeting at the Belfast town hall was debunked. Her only appearance at the Belfast City Hall was to see Christmas lights turned on. She also attended a 50-minute meeting which, according to the Belfast Daily Telegraph’s report at the time, “[was] a little bit stilted, a little prepared at times.” Brian Feeney, an Irish author and former politician, sums it up: “The road to peace was carefully documented, and she wasn’t on it.”

Bosnia:

Senator Clinton has pointed to a March 1996 trip to Bosnia as proof that her foreign travel involved a life-risking mission into a war zone. She has described dodging sniper fire. While she did travel to Bosnia in March 1996, the visit was not a high-stakes mission to a war zone. On March 26, 1996, the New York Times reported that “Hillary Rodham Clinton charmed American troops at a U.S.O. show here, but it didn’t hurt that the singer Sheryl Crow and the comedian Sinbad were also on the stage.”

Kosovo:

Senator Clinton has said, “I negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo.” It is true that, as First Lady, she traveled to Macedonia and visited a Kosovar refugee camp. It is also true that she met with government officials while she was there. First Ladies frequently meet with government officials. Her claim to have “negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo,” however, is not true. Her trip to Macedonia took place on May 14, 1999. The borders were opened the day before, on May 13, 1999.

The negotiations that led to the opening of the borders were accomplished by the people who ordinarily conduct negotiations with foreign governments – U.S. diplomats. President Clinton’s top envoy to the Balkans, former Ambassador Robert Gelbard, said, “I cannot recall any involvement by Senator Clinton in this issue.” Ivo Daalder worked on the Clinton Administration’s National Security Council and wrote a definitive history of the Kosovo conflict. He recalls that “she had absolutely no role in the dirty work of negotiations.”

Rwanda:

Last year, former President Clinton asserted that his wife pressed him to intervene with U.S. troops to stop the Rwandan genocide. When asked about this assertion, Hillary Clinton said it was true. There is no evidence, however, to suggest that this ever happened. Even those individuals who were advocating a much more robust U.S. effort to stop the genocide did not argue for the use of U.S. troops. No one recalls hearing that Hillary Clinton had any interest in this course of action. Based on a fair and thorough review of National Security Council deliberations during those tragic months, there is no evidence to suggest that U.S. military intervention was ever discussed. Prudence Bushnell, the Assistant Secretary of State with responsibility for Africa, has recalled that there was no consideration of U.S. military intervention.

At no time prior to her campaign for the presidency did Senator Clinton ever make the claim that she supported intervening militarily to stop the Rwandan genocide. It is noteworthy that she failed to mention this anecdote – urging President Clinton to intervene militarily in Rwanda – in her memoirs. President Clinton makes no mention of such a conversation with his wife in his memoirs. And Madeline Albright, who was Ambassador to the United Nations at the time, makes no mention of any such event in her memoirs.

Hillary Clinton did visit Rwanda in March 1998 and, during that visit, her husband apologized for America’s failure to do more to prevent the genocide.

China:

Senator Clinton also points to a speech that she delivered in Beijing in 1995 as proof of her ability to answer a 3 AM crisis phone call. It is strange that Senator Clinton would base her own foreign policy experience on a speech that she gave over a decade ago, since she so frequently belittles Barack Obama’s speeches opposing the Iraq War six years ago. Let there be no doubt: she gave a good speech in Beijing, and she stood up for women’s rights. But Senator Obama’s opposition to the War in Iraq in 2002 is relevant to the question of whether he, as Commander-in-Chief, will make wise judgments about the use of military force. Senator Clinton’s speech in Beijing is not.

Senator Obama’s speech opposing the war in Iraq shows independence and courage as well as good judgment. In the speech that Senator Clinton says does not qualify him to be Commander in Chief, Obama criticized what he called “a rash war . . . a war based not on reason, but on passion, not on principle, but on politics.” In that speech, he said prophetically: “[E]ven a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.” He predicted that a U.S. invasion of Iraq would “fan the flames of the Middle East,” and “strengthen the recruitment arm of al Qaeda.” He urged the United States first to “finish the fight with Bin Laden and al Qaeda.”

If the U.S. government had followed Barack Obama’s advice in 2002, we would have avoided one of the greatest foreign policy catastrophes in our nation’s history. Some of the most “experienced” men in national security affairs – Vice President Cheney and Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others – led this nation into that catastrophe. That lesson should teach us something about the value of judgment over experience. Longevity in Washington, D.C. does not guarantee either wisdom of judgment.

Conclusion:

The Clinton campaign’s argument is nothing more than mere assertion, dramatized in a scary television commercial with a telephone ringing in the middle of the night. There is no support for or substance in the claim that Senator Clinton has passed “the Commander-in-Chief test.” That claim – as the TV ad – consists of nothing more than making the assertion, repeating it frequently to the voters and hoping that they will believe it.

On the most critical foreign policy judgment of our generation – the War in Iraq – Senator Clinton voted in support of a resolution entitled “The Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of U.S. Military Force Against Iraq.” As she cast that vote, she said: “This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make – any vote that may lead to war should be hard – but I cast it with conviction.” In this campaign, Senator Clinton has argued – remarkably – that she wasn’t actually voting for war, she was voting for diplomacy. That claim is no more credible than her other claims of foreign policy experience. The real tragedy is that we are still living with the terrible consequences of her misjudgment. The Bush Administration continues to cite that resolution as its authorization – like a blank check – to fight on with no end in sight.

Barack Obama has a very simple case. On the most important commander in chief test of our generation, he got it right, and Senator Clinton got it wrong. In truth, Senator Obama has much more foreign policy experience than either Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan had when they were elected. Senator Obama has worked to confront 21st century challenges like proliferation and genocide on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He possesses the personal attributes of a great leader – an even temperament, an open-minded approach to even the most challenging problems, a willingness to listen to all views, clarity of vision, the ability to inspire, conviction and courage.

And Barack Obama does not use false charges and exaggerated claims to play politics with national security.

——————————————————————————–
Sphere: Related Content | Email | Print | Comments

——————————————————————————–

Related Topics: clinton | election 2008 | foreign policy | obama |
Sponsored Links

Login | Register | RSS
Greg Craig
Author Archive Latest From this Author
Senator Clinton’s Claims of Foreign Policy Experience Are Exaggerated
About Us | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy © RealClearPolitics 2008

Hillary’s number priority is hillary. She will do or say anything to be the president. She is corrupt. wake up america.

Hillary Where Were You July 18 1996. Article in World Net Daily

Founded 1997 Saturday, March 22, 2008 Today’s Edition

FREE News Flashes

WND Directory
Shop.WND
Page 1 News
Page 2 News
Commentary
G2 Bulletin
WND Poll
WND Forums
Letters to the Editor
MoneyNetDaily
SportsNetDaily
TV Guide
Weather

WND Resources
About WND
WND Scoops
WND Books
Advertise with WND
Put WND headlines on your site
Make WND your home page
Sign up for WND Email Alerts
Voluntary Payment
Download to your PDA
US Newspapers
Foreign Newspapers
Major News Wires
Other News Services
Other Sites
Writers Archives
Contact Government Officials
Search Engines
Media
Entertainment

WND People
Contact WND
Who’s Who at WND
Speakers and Talk Show Guests
Columnists

——————————————————————————–

——————————————————————————–
Hillary: Where were you at 3 a.m. July 18, 1996?

——————————————————————————–
Posted: March 22, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

© 2008

Predictably, Hillary, when the National Archives released 11.000 pages of your schedule as first lady, the media focused on the unenlightening and the inconsequential.

Where were you when Bill soiled Monica’s blue dress? Where were you when Bill was impeached? When did you first start work on health care reform?

But Hillary, there is one question that needs to be asked, one that cuts right to you own claim to the presidency: Where were you at 3 a.m. on the morning of July 18, 1996?

In the ad that helped you win the Texas primary, a hushed male voice solemnly observes, “It is 3 a.m. and your children are safe and asleep. But there is a phone in the White House and it is ringing.”

The announcer continues, “Something is happening in the world” asking the listener, “Who do you want answering the phone?”

The answer, of course, is you, Hillary, “someone tested and ready to lead in a dangerous world.”

In fact, as your schedule reveals, you once found yourself in exactly that position. So please, why not share that experience with the world?

(Column continues below)

To refresh your memory, on the night of July 17, 1996, you and Bill attended a gala for the Women’s Leadership Forum of the Democratic National Committee at the Sheraton Washington Hotel.

After working the rope line, at 8:35 p.m. you and Bill left the Sheraton by presidential motorcade.

At 8:31 p.m., however, a few hundred miles away, that hot line was about to start ringing.

Two FAA veterans at the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center had observed a target arching and intersecting with TWA Flight 800 as it headed east off Long Island’s south shore.

The controllers reported what they saw immediately. A manager from that center rushed the radar data to the FAA technical center in Atlantic City for further analysis.

In Atlantic City, a playback of the data was recorded on videotape and plotted onto paper. From there, it was faxed to FAA headquarters in Washington and rushed “immediately” to the White House.

“Holy c–-, this looks bad,” said Ron Schleede of the National Transportation Safety Board upon first seeing the data that “suggested something fast made the turn and took the airplane.”

Obama man Richard Clarke got the message, too. By 9 p.m., he was driving in to the White House to convene a meeting of his security group.

As you know, he did not call such a meeting after the ValuJet crash two months earlier. Clarke was clearly worried.

“I dreaded what I thought was about to happen,” he told us in “Against All Enemies,” “The Eisenhower option.”

Had Iran been behind the downing of TWA Flight 800 – or Iraq for that matter – the president would have had to respond. In fact, Clarke labeled this chapter of his book, “The Almost War, 1996.”

You and Bill arrived at the White House at 8:45 p.m. You were still likely unaware of the incident when you retired to the family residence.

Curiously, when Bill did find out about the disaster, he chose not to join Clarke and the other agency representatives in the White House situation room.

He remained holed up in the family quarters with you. Did he stay there because he needed you by his side during this crisis?

Retired Air Force Lt. Col. Robert “Buzz” Patterson and others have confirmed that the president kept to the family quarters.

Patterson was in a position to know. He carried the nuclear football for the president, and he too was in the White House, though clearly out of the loop.

Patterson is not sure who is in the residence with you. The one person he can tentatively cite is Sandy Berger, the deputy director of the NSA and the kind of guy you could, well, depend on.

All night Sandy and the president gathered information. And we can safely assume you were not baking cookies while they were doing this.

The eyewitness accounts were now confirming what the FAA radar picked up. In time, 270 people along the Long Island coast would eventually tell the FBI that they saw flaming objects streaking up toward the plane, culminating in a series of massive explosions.

Did you see the satellite data? On Oct. 4, 2001, Defense Department satellites equipped with infrared sensors captured a Ukrainian missile striking a Russian airliner 30,000 feet above the Black Sea.

Our government informed Russia within five minutes. After TWA Flight 800’s demise, all satellites were said to be malfunctioning. You could possibly confirm or deny.

Curiously, as you know, Bill’s national security adviser, Tony Lake – and Sandy Berger’s boss – was downstairs in his office during that night.

By 3 a.m. you all had apparently gathered enough information to call Lake with the following message: “Dust off the contingency plans.”

Yes, the Eisenhower Option. But right now, especially on these terms, with the 1996 election comfortably in the bag, war was the last thing you wanted or needed.

Yet for all the peril and intrigue of that first night of near war, one that kept the family quarters humming until at least 3 a.m. – your time to shine – in “Living History,” your 500-plus page memoir, you summarized the entire episode in exactly one-third of one sentence.

You do not even mention your emotionally wrenching day among the victims’ families in Long Island a week later.

Don’t be shy, Hillary. This is a great opportunity to remind us why you are “tested and ready to lead in a dangerous world.” You were there.

——————————————————————————–

Related special offer:

Get Jack Cashill’s groundbreaking exposé, “First Strike: TWA Flight 800 and the Attack on America”

——————————————————————————–

Jack Cashill is an Emmy-award winning independent writer and producer with a Ph.D. in American Studies from Purdue.

——————————————————————————–

——————————————————————————–

E-mail to a Friend Printer-friendly version

EMAIL JACK CASHILL | GO TO JACK CASHILL ARCHIVE

| Page 1 | Page 2 | Commentary | MoneyNetDaily | G2 Bulletin | About Us | Terms of Use | Privacy | Contact Us |
Copyright 1997-2008
All Rights Reserved. WorldNetDaily.com Inc.

Today’s WND
News Highlights
Paper promotes ‘Res-erection’ homo-sex play on Good Friday
Canada orders ministry by Christians shut down
Former police officer: ‘Canada tortured me’
Francis Schaeffer’s son: Dad ‘worse’ than Obama’s pastor
Obama church published Hamas terror manifesto
Clinton-Obama animosity dates back to ‘99
Photo refutes Hillary ’sniper fire’ account
Christian school battles discrimination complaint
Shell exec says world not running out of oil
Anything that grows ‘can convert into oil’
Sandra Day O’Connor justifies prayer limits
Librarian fired for reporting child pornography
Innocent wife and mom spends 5 days in jail
Meet your new daily guide to hard economic times
7 strategic tips for small-business start-ups
Craig R. Smith on Fox News to discuss economy
Bernanke: Federal Reserve caused Great Depression

Today’s WND
Commentary Highlights
Go, go, go with BHO!
- By Joseph Farah
The blame game works both ways
- By Pat Boone
Fired for protecting children?
- By Jonathan Falwell
GOP: Focus on what’s right, not Wright
- By Star Parker
Why I became a conservative
- By Ellis Washington
Time for a Commission on the Status of Freedom
- By Henry Lamb
Easter: A time for 2nd chances
- By Greg Laurie
Hillary: Where were you at 3 a.m. July 18, 1996?
- By Jack Cashill
7 strategic tips for small-business start-ups
- By Karin Abarbanel

http://fray.slate.com/discuss/forums/post/1020418.aspx

Its 3.am the eagle has landed.Clintonites follow this lead to see who the real comedian is .Click on the blue links.

Greta, today was one of the worst interviews [with Hillary Clinton] that Fox News has ever done and you co-signed!!! Hillary blamed Senator Obama for disenfranchising Michigan and Florida voters. Senator Obama said and you know it, he wanted a fair outcome and wanted the delegates seated at the convention. HILLARY KNOWINGLY BROKE DEMOCRATIC PARTY RULES. She said when ahead in polls, Michigan and Florida would not count. Senator Obama followed the rules and did campaign there, or put his name on the ballot in Michigan. NOW, she is stating it’s his fault and those votes WILL BE COUNTED and you stood there and allowed her to lye.

You have also been so UNFAIR to REV WRIGHT, Senator Obama and the TRINTY UNITY CHURCH. PLEASE ask high ranking representatives from that church to talk to your news station. Rev. Wright is a prominent and respected religious leader. He has been the guest of the White House several times and seen shaking hands with Bill Clinton. The Clinton should explain THIER relationship with him. His sermons… by Shawn Hannity, was edited and taken OUT OF context. I have viewed the ENTIRE sermons and they are uplifting. Give Trinity a chance to explain their side. That is fair and responsible journalism.

The Clintons and McCain should and MUST address race in this country. Senator Obama DID an OUTSTANDING job…..” A More Perfuect Union” speech. Race is a huge divide. Blacks folks feel insulted, election after election because our needs are never spoken about. Or if they are ….people like Pat Buchanan say, Black folks should thank white folks for slavery and giving them their religion. Thankful for lynching and separation of family!?!?!

I am feed up with this type of journalism and will contacting progressive organizations to put a stop to it.

The USA Today/Gallup survey clearly explains why Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is losing. Asked whether the candidates were “honest and trustworthy,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) won with 67 percent, with Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) right behind him at 63. Hillary scored only 44 percent, the lowest rating for any candidate for any attribute in the poll.

Hillary simply cannot tell the truth. Here’s her scorecard:

Image Blocked Admitted Lies

• Chelsea was jogging around the Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. (She was in bed watching it on TV.)

• Hillary was named after Sir Edmund Hillary. (She admitted she was wrong. He climbed Mt. Everest five years after her birth.)

• She was under sniper fire in Bosnia. (A girl presented her with flowers at the foot of the ramp.)

• She learned in The Wall Street Journal how to make a killing in the futures market. (It didn’t cover the market back then.)

Whoppers She Won’t Confess To

• She didn’t know about the FALN pardons.

• She didn’t know that her brothers were being paid to get pardons that Clinton granted.

• Taking the White House gifts was a clerical error.

• She didn’t know that her staff would fire the travel office staff after she told them to do so.

• She didn’t know that the Peter Paul fundraiser in Hollywood in 2000 cost $700,000 more than she reported it had.

• She opposed NAFTA at the time.

• She was instrumental in the Irish peace process.

• She urged Bill to intervene in Rwanda.

• She played a role in the ’90s economic recovery.

• The billing records showed up on their own.

• She thought Bill was innocent when the Monica scandal broke.

• She was always a Yankees fan.

• She had nothing to do with the New Square Hasidic pardons (after they voted for her 1,400-12 and she attended a meeting at the White House about the pardons).

• She negotiated for the release of refugees in Macedonia (who were released the day before she got there).

With a record like that, is it any wonder that we suspect her of being less than honest and straightforward?

Why has McCain jumped out to a nine-point lead over Obama and a seven-point lead over Hillary in the latest Rasmussen poll? OK, Obama has had the Rev. Wright mess on his hands. And Hillary has come in for her share of negatives, like the Richardson endorsement of Obama and the denouement of her latest lie — that she endured sniper fire d uring a trip to Bosnia. But why has McCain gained so much in so short a period of time? Most polls had the general election tied two weeks ago.

McCain’s virtues require a contrast in order to stand out. His strength, integrity, solidity and dependability all are essentially passive virtues, which shine only by contrast with others. Now that Obama and Hillary are offering images that are much weaker, less honest, and less solid and dependable, good old John McCain looks that much better as he tours Iraq and Israel while the Democrats rip one another apart.

It took Nixon for us to appreciate Jimmy Carter’s simple honesty. It took Clinton and Monica for us to value George W. Bush’s personal character. And it takes the unseemly battle among the Democrats for us to give John McCain his due.

When Obama faces McCain in the general election (not if but when) the legacy of the Wright scandal will not be to question Obama’s patriotism or love of America. It wil l be to ask if he has the right stuff (pardon the pun).

The largest gap between McCain and Obama in the most recent USA Today/Gallup Poll was on the trait of leadership. Asked if each man was a “strong, decisive leader,” 69 percent felt that the description fit McCain while only 56 percent thought it would apply to Obama. (61 percent said it of Hillary.) Obama has looked weak handling the Rev. Wright controversy. His labored explanation of why he attacks the sin but loves the sinner comes across as elegant but, at the same time, feeble. Obama’s reluctance to trade punches with his opponents makes us wonder if he could trade them with bin Laden or Ahmadinejad. We have no doubt that McCain would gladly come to blows and would represent us well, but about Obama we are not so sure.

Hilliary did not lie! All she did was try to make the playing field between herself and a true American hero a little more even. That makes her perhaps envious and a little devious, oh what the hell a little lie isn’t that bad. But it does show a tendency to exaggerate the truth if you don’t care or think you can’t get busted or nobody would believe a Clinton would lie. Or would they?

Is it an optical illusion or is Hilliary’s nose getting longer after each time she is interviewed about her personal and political experiences.

I really hate, really HATE the way every net work, news channel belittles everything Hillary says
everything she dose, everything she wears, the media is trying to elect the popular one.
Not who can help us . A freaking party or a freaking race. Dear God, Please think about All
the people. Not a race, or Party Every one Knows Hillary has what this country needs. The war
in Iraq to our in the toilet economy. Please tell the stupid Leaders to stand for the best not
the in style black guy.

Do some good reporting on HILLARY for a change.