Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 249

• 0%

  Bkumm6 months, 2 weeks ago

  This guy has to be completely exhausted, but I was inspired by his speech. I'm already a supporter, but now I'm REALLY a supporter.

  There can be only one choice for a unified, forward looking America:

  Obama/Edwards '08

  Reply

  7 Replies

  • 0%

    Neophile6 months, 2 weeks ago

    Here's the full video of this speech:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dzHDzvTfzQ

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      Bkumm6 months, 2 weeks ago

      Thanks Neo.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        Welfare_Made_Me_Rich6 months, 2 weeks ago

        WoW! I've been so pre-occupied with the race, I've not given much thought to the running mate.

        But that would be an _awesome_ ticket.

        Of course, I would prefer it to be the other way around, but I could imagine that that combination would be a very strong duo.

        And I think they could put a stop to all the Welfare for the Wealthy and the Corporations that The Modern Republican has made as their central platform.

        Did you know that Warren Buffet pays a lower tax rate than anybody in the middle class?

        That, my friend, is the essence of The Modern Republican's Philosophy.

        Free lunch for the Wealthy, the Well Connected, and Corporations.

        Reply
  • 0%

    Sandokan6 months, 2 weeks ago

    He's not tough enough & his staff will not be up to it. He will not be right ...from day one.

    H.Clinton - no matter what arguments can be attempted ...will have the same calibur of staff that Bill put together. It's the staff that makes a difference.

    Too bad every Presidential candidate wasn't required to reveal their choice of staff.

    End of story.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      ybdogsct6 months, 2 weeks ago

      SANDOKAN:

      "He's not tough enough & his staff will not be up to it. H.Clinton will have the same calibur of staff that Bill put together. It's the staff that makes a difference."

      http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007...

      "When Deval Patrick called on a sea of nearly 10,000 people to support Barack Obama for president, he became only the latest in a series of high-profile officials from Bill Clinton's administration endorsing, advising, or working for Obama...Half a dozen Obama supporters with Clinton roots said they see [Obama] as the face of the future and the best hope for the party."

      http://www.usnews.com/blogs/news-desk/2008/1/24...

      "Bill Clinton's increasingly angry and touchy campaigning on behalf of his wife is prompting more former associates and aides to privately question his tactics."

      Reply
  • 0%

    questionseverything6 months, 2 weeks ago

    i admit obama/edwards would be a dream team ticket but i have it in my head that the country would be better served with edwards as AG...cleaning up the trash from last 7 plus yrs

    Reply
  • 0%

    somecommonsense6 months, 2 weeks ago

    Obama has raised 4.6 million since Polls closed on feb 5th, Bill and Hillary just opened their purse to put in 5 million of their own money, I just gave another 50 to Barack.

    I find it interesting that Hillary has taken more money from defense contractors than any other candidate but is now broke, weird.

    Reply
• 0%

  jordan116 months, 2 weeks ago

  I'm very disappointed at the call for CA, but it isn't over yet. I really want Obama to have the nomination, but will vote for Clinton if she gets it.

  Reply

  28 Replies

  • 0%

    DanmLiberals6 months, 2 weeks ago

    I thought uur against the war. why would you vote for someone who voted for the war? Isn't that a little convenient considering all the ****** u talk about the war and Bush? Wait her husband though Saddam should be taken out too. So both of them are like bush.

    Reply

    13 Replies

    • 0%

      Aidenag6 months, 2 weeks ago

      Obama was not for the war in iraq. you might want to look into his past a bit more damnliberals.. What he has voted for though is making sure our troops are not killed by lack of funding and supplies now that they are stuck in Iraq, and bush showed no sign of bringing them home..

      Last, he has said that as president he would bring them home.

      Reply

      12 Replies

      • 0%

        DanmLiberals6 months, 2 weeks ago

        sorry I was talking about his Hillary comment. It makes me feel cheated that Dems are voting for Hillary after all the negative things they said about Bush and the war. They come up with lame excuses but in the end she is no different than Bush.

        I give credit to Osama for having the balls(no pun intended) to stick up for what he believes. At least he can look in the mirror at the end of the day and have some integrity. On the other hand, Hillary will say whatever in the hell she can too win.

        Reply

        11 Replies

        • 0%

          DanmLiberals6 months, 2 weeks ago

          Btw, bringing them home won't happen. thats a lie. We need that oil and Obama will find that out fast if he is president. We also have one of the biggest bases in the world being built there.

          Btw, if he takes us out and Al quaeda takes over Iraq, wont we have to go in again?

          Reply

          7 Replies

          • 0%

            Bkumm6 months, 2 weeks ago

            Senator Obama has a plan that will, over time, eliminate our need for foreign oil by investing in that which America has in abundance. Human energy, will, innovation and perseverance. If we invest in those things, how can we possibly fail?

            I don't believe that Al Queda will take over Iraq. Iran might take over part of Iraq. Turkey may try to take over northern Iraq and the Saudis may annex southern Iraq, but...wait a minute. Problem solved!!! LOL>>>

            Of course it isn't that easy and there isn't such a thing as a good solution, but we can't afford to keep nearly 150,000 combat troops in Iraq indefinitely.

            Reply

            3 Replies

            • 0%

              slate6 months, 2 weeks ago

              Yeah what's that timetable? Next week, 1 10 20 30 125 years?

              Reply

              2 Replies

              • 0%

                lovemylibs6 months, 2 weeks ago

                Did you leave out a comma or a decimal?

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 0%

                  slate6 months, 2 weeks ago

                  I didn't use em let me do that so Neo will be able to understand. Next Week, 1 year, 10 years, 20 years, 30 years or 125 years,

                  Reply
          • 0%

            vor6 months, 2 weeks ago

            The neocon plan can and hopefully will be dismantled and perhaps the world will breath a bit easier. There will always be nuts like Al Qaeda in this world. Those who believe their cause is greater than any other. Afterall we raised Tim McVeigh right here in America. Attacking a soveriegn nation pre-emptively is hardly the way to resolve that issue.

            We need to have a rational foreign policy. Frankly Obama's lack of experience should be seen as a plus. We have Dick Cheney with 40 years of experience directing the current mess like a rudderless commander who is driven purely by idealogy. At least hopefully Obama would be smart enough not to allow himself to be overwhelmed by his advisors as occured with GW. Certainly he wont be kow-towing to the neocons.

            Reply
          • 0%

            somecommonsense6 months, 2 weeks ago

            Damn libs you are amazing, whenever I want to see how base and ignorant some people are, I just need to come to an obama thread and read the first comment where someone writes "osama" what a lame human being you are...your points are so simplistic, how are you allowed to vote...someone should cage this guys...no I mean like in an actual cage!

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              somecommonsense6 months, 2 weeks ago

              Oh and you're a racist and probably very ugly...hahaha.

              Reply
        • 0%

          Aidenag6 months, 2 weeks ago

          I feel cheated too damnliberals. It blows my mind that hillary is leading right now for the dem nomination. She voted for the war, she is in the pocket of K-street, big oil, and special interests. She is basiclly a republican, minus the religious aspects.

          How any democrat could vote for her over Obama is beyond me. She stands for far too many things that this party is not about.

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            sotiris-k6 months, 2 weeks ago

            Hillary has alread lost but doesnt know it. California ended with a 7% differential. Yet 25% was votes that were mailed weeks ago when the polls were at 53-33 or a 20% differential. How does a 20% become 7% in a matter of a few days? Because if you give people some time to see things for what they really are under some scrutiny they get it. The true live differential in California is less than 2-3% today. This is the true separation as we speak. If people had the ability to vote again a great 15% of the votes registered yesterday would be different. Hillary had the initial edge but Obama has the positive first derivative now. Give it a few weeks or let them get to the conference and see who gets the nomination when rational brains get the choice to do the proper thing. In the meantime there is still substantial chance we wont even need that based on pure momentum and exposure. A person like Obama has one big friend that people who cheat lie and manipulate situations hate , TIME!

            Reply
        • 0%

          Candida6 months, 2 weeks ago

          DanmLiberals: "I give credit to Osama for having the balls(no pun intended) to stick up for what he believes. At least he can look in the mirror at the end of the day and have some integrity."

          Definitely more than you have. Nice slip on the keyboard.

          Reply
  • 0%

    Sandokan6 months, 2 weeks ago

    Good for you; Jordan11. Obama doesnt have a record ...and hasn't had time to have enough skeletons in his closet.

    Obama is a sneaky sneaky liberal.

    Hillary has shown that she can focus & is a team player. Her character is strength ...she will be the first woman President in the USA.

    Reply

    13 Replies

    • 0%

      Welfare_Made_Me_Rich6 months, 2 weeks ago

      I am fine with either candidate.

      Aidenag's observations above are dead on.

      Hillary is essentially a conservative. The only issue where she might diverge there and be pro-active is arriving at some kind of Health Care solution for the 50 million Americans without.

      Of course, she could surprise everyone.

      I think she's got it in her to stand up to the Pay for Play system instituted in such a big way by The Modern Republican.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        lovemylibs6 months, 2 weeks ago

        I love how she steels her resolve before making her stand against the Pay for Play. She does this by taking big corporate dollars to see who is in the game. It helps her represent change, hope and democracy.

        Reply
    • 0%

      somecommonsense6 months, 2 weeks ago

      Saying Obama doesn't have a record doesnt make it so...and "sneaky" LOL! Where do you people come from. How is HIllary not sneaky, she voted for the bankruptcy bill, voted no on the biden amend, votes yes for war authorization, has taken more money from defense contractors than any candidate including rape-publicans, has here husband playing the race card any chance he gets, oh and America listen up...you don't need to be racist to play the race card, what Bill was doing was hoping to play to other people's racism...all this being said I will reluctantly vote for Hillary if she is the nominee, because the alternative is tooooo frightening but lets not be naive here, she is only winning by super delegates and if democrats are comfortable that a person can win more states AND more delegates but will lose to super delegates well then you don't support real democracy.

      Reply

      7 Replies

      • 0%

        RedstateLib6 months, 2 weeks ago

        "she voted for the bankruptcy bill"

        Lies,lies and more lies show me she voted for this she did not vote for that:

        Public Statements

        "Speaker: Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (NY)

        Title: Statement of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Congressional Record on the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005

        Date: 03/10/2005

        Speech

        Statement of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Congressional Record on the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005

        While I strongly believe that Congress should act to fix the problems in our bankruptcy system, I also believe that this bill is misguided and deeply flawed.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          somecommonsense6 months, 2 weeks ago

          According to roll call she chose not to vote and Edwards was not a senator at that time but I am not sure what bill they were referring to because during a debate she apologized for the vote and said she shouldn't have both her and edwards...

          Reply
      • 0%

        RedstateLib6 months, 2 weeks ago

        "This bankruptcy bill fundamentally fails to accord with the traditional purposes of bankruptcy, which recognize that we are ALL better off when hard-working people who have suffered financial catastrophe get a "fresh start" and a second chance to become productive and contributing members of society. With the passage of this legislation, which makes obtaining this fresh start more expensive and more difficult, we are ensuring that many responsible Americans will continue to be buried under mountains of debt, and unable to take back control and responsibility for their lives."

        Reply
      • 0%

        RedstateLib6 months, 2 weeks ago

        "Our nation's bankruptcy law developed out of a recognition that the world can be a competitive, often unforgiving place. Bankruptcy reform should therefore be directed toward creating a civil society in which valuing individual responsibility is not incompatible with admitting the enduring truth that sometimes bad things happen to responsible, hardworking people. Sometimes, conscientious Americans need help and support against forces that are too big for them to stand against alone. It should be about making sure that both large corporations and individual citizens are held to the same standards of responsibility and accountability."

        Reply
      • 0%

        RedstateLib6 months, 2 weeks ago

        "This bill is flawed in a number of ways. But I want to begin by commenting on one of its most distressing elements. As many people know, I have long been concerned about the burdens placed on America's families by a lack of health care insurance and by rising healthcare costs. In this bill, the Senate had an opportunity to take one important step to help citizens driven to the point of bankruptcy by unavoidable medical problems. Instead, the Senate rejected this opportunity to lighten the load on Americans dealing with the twin blows of medical and financial difficulties."

        Reply
      • 0%

        RedstateLib6 months, 2 weeks ago

        "This legislation, especially after refusal, after refusal, after refusal to support amendments to improve it, is unfair and unjust.

        In short, the legislation that the Senate is voting on today, could have, with more careful and good-faith consideration, been a vehicle in which we could have thoughtfully addressed abuses in the bankruptcy process by both consumers and corporations. Unfortunately, the Senate leadership chose to go down a different road.

        Because of unforeseen and unavoidable circumstances, I will not be present when the Senate votes on final passage of this bill today. But were I able to be here, I would vote no, because this bill is clearly not in the best interests of the American people."

        Those are excerpts of the public statement she made she made it very clear that she opposed the bill. Unlike the controversial non votes that Obama hs avoided discussing.

        Reply
      • 0%

        Mdiar6 months, 2 weeks ago

        somecommonsense, sorry about the negative sort of. I understand the negative feeling about Republicans out there and references to them as you did and recently I've began to stop negging the comments at times, if the rest of the post has value. Your post certainly did have comments that were quite intelligent for the most part. The term "rape" can upset me alot sometimes and I dislike seeing it in insults (I know some people who have had that happen, as in had that act committed upon them) so don't read to much into the negative please lol. I think the Democrats should get rid of the super delegates myself. Obama is my favorite candidate in the race now, that is feasible at least.

        Reply
    • 0%

      slate6 months, 2 weeks ago

      she will be the first woman President in the USA.

      Shudder,,,,, nooooooo! Please waterboard me, tear my fingernails out,,,, poke me eyes out with a Hot poker,,, just pulllleeezee no Hillary as President,,,, If she wins, I swear I'll have Neo move out of the country!

      Reply
    • 0%

      Radiofreeeuropa6 months, 2 weeks ago

      Obama has the intangible talent to inspire and hence lead.

      I have more confidence that he will assemble a great cabinet than I do in the sun rising tomorrow. What evidence do you have that he is "sneaky" Sandokan? I think republicans would love to run against Hillary.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        Mdiar6 months, 2 weeks ago

        RFE your quite right on all your points I think. Not only does Obama have the more intangible aspects in his favor but he also has the moral high-ground on Iraq and the fact that he knows he is not as experienced and will use experienced advisers from, I think at least, both sides of the aisle. Even if its just a show of bipartisanship it would be something the country truly needs. McCain against Clinton would be close, McCain against Obama would be a landslide for Obama I think.

        Reply
• 0%

  Bkumm6 months, 2 weeks ago

  Senator Obama is, in my opinion, the only real choice, not just for the Democrats, but for all Americans. I believe, based on his speeches and what I've read from him, that he will respect conservative issues such as government spending, national defense, securing the borders and tax reform. I also believe that he will respect liberal issues such as the war in Iraq, education, health care and the environment.

  While doing all of this, I also believe that he will advance American issues such as fighting terrorism, building a strong economy and improving quality of life for all Americans.

  One America. One People. One Republic. United we can not fall and we will not fail. Can we do it? Yes we can.

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    Sandokan6 months, 2 weeks ago

    LOL .... anyone Oprah gets behind ...I suspect.

    Reply
• 0%

  Touareg6 months, 2 weeks ago

  LOL watch 0:14 when that woman fall on the right, its funny.

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    Bkumm6 months, 2 weeks ago

    I think that might have actually been a real live swoon. You know like in the old movies when the corsets were so tight any change in blood pressure could send a woman into a faint. It looked almost like that!!!

    Reply
• 0%

  Spadecaller6 months, 2 weeks ago

  Keep up the good fight; Obama and Edwards '08!

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    2sidestoeverything6 months, 2 weeks ago

    I'll second that!

    Reply
• 0%

  Albmore6 months, 2 weeks ago

  ANY democrat that says they want change and votes for the Clintons are liars.

  Reply

  5 Replies

  • 0%

    Neophile6 months, 2 weeks ago

    Or they have been deceived.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      lovemylibs6 months, 2 weeks ago

      Is it possible for the Clintons to deceive so many when all Hillary wants is what's best for this nation.

      Reply
  • 0%

    Bkumm6 months, 2 weeks ago

    Neo is right. It isn't about lying, it's about being confused on the issues.

    The Clinton name has enormous swing in the Democratic Party, but as we saw last night, change, unity and issues are also very important.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      slate6 months, 2 weeks ago

      Ah if the left does it it's 'being confused on the issues' but if the right does it it's out right lies?

      Reply
  • 0%

    Sandokan6 months, 2 weeks ago

    Yes ...and anyone who voted for Bush is a congenital idiot!!!

    Who is the only President to put this country's economic bottom line into the black???? Fact & History show that it will be the same last name as the woman running for President now.

    Iron Lady Hillary ... Terrorists beware!!!

    Reply
• 0%

  AntiNeoCon6 months, 2 weeks ago

  I am not as sold on Obama as the rest of you...maybe because I have been studying him closely for some time. He uses the I/me word excessively for one thing, and comes across a bit on the too slick side. I may be wrong...only time will tell.

  I will vote for him if he is nominated as I don't see any of the republican candidates improving our lives.

  Reply

  8 Replies

  • 0%

    Georgia506 months, 2 weeks ago

    I would vote for a candidate who understands the role of president is not to improve our lives, but to stay the hell out of our lives so we can improve it ourselves.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      RedstateLib6 months, 2 weeks ago

      Yeah, to heck with that "promote the general welfare" crap that those liberal socialist put in the preamble of the Constitution. Constitution we don't need no Constitution.

      Reply
  • 0%

    Sandokan6 months, 2 weeks ago

    Anti ...extremely astute observation!!! Too bad the rest of America wasn't doing the same thing.

    Reply
  • 0%

    cushi6 months, 2 weeks ago

    I don't get your problem with his use of I/me. He IS the person running, isn't he? Who else should he be referring to? The buck stops with him, does it not? I like the fact that he remains thoughtful and keeps a cool head under pressure - much rather have him control that red button than a hot head like McCain or a wishy washy Hillary! I think he's the genuine article (or as close as we're gonna get to it) and he comes under more scrutiny than many of the other candidates. So far, he comes up smelling like a breath of fresh air!

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      Candida6 months, 2 weeks ago

      I agree. The only pronoun I hear more from him than from others is "we."

      Reply
  • 0%

    Radiofreeeuropa6 months, 2 weeks ago

    I get the impression more from all the other candidates that they are running because "I want to be president" . Obama strikes me as more about I believe WE can solve this problem.

    Reply
  • 0%

    ADAGUY6 months, 2 weeks ago

    Are you aware that you just said "I" 5 times in that short post?

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      AntiNeoCon6 months, 2 weeks ago

      Thanks for pointing that out AdaGuy...will work on that. But "I" am not running for president. Politics is after all an art of illusion and deception like a magic show. They can appear to be something they aren't and usually do. And "I" am not an easy sell. They "all" will say what you want to hear to get your vote. Just like McCain now, sucking up to the NeoCons...ita all a frigging dog and pony show. Their actions and records speak louder than their words consider this also.

      Reply
• 0%

  MilitaryWifeVote4HillaryClinton6 months, 2 weeks ago

  WILL BARACK OBAMA PULL TROOPS OUT OF IRAQ AND QUICKLY SEND THEM TO AFRICA?

  SIMPLY BECAUSE ACCORDING TO HIS CHURCH THEY HAVE A NON-NEGOTIABLE COMMITMENT TO AFRICA, SO WOULD HE USE HIS POWER AS THE PRESIDENT HERE TO INVADE THERE?

  IF THATS THE CASE, I WONDER IF OBAMA'S PRIORITY WILL BE AFRICA OVER THE U.S.'S PROBLEMS? IF SO, THEN THINGS WON'T "CHANGE" MUCH FROM THE PRESIDENT WE HAVE NOW! THE ONLY "CHANGE" THERE WILL BE IS WHAT COUNTRY THE U.S. WILL BE FORCED TO BE IN, BEFORE DEALING WITH OUR OWN U.S. PROBLEMS.

  ESPECIALLY SINCE ONE OF OBAMA'S COUSINS HAS HIGH POLITICAL PULL WITHIN THE AFRICAN GOVERNMENT.

  JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT.

  LINKS:

  ABOUT OBAMA'S TIES TO AFRICA:

  http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/01/31/obamas-...

  ABOUT OBAMA'S CHURCH & THEIR NON-NEGOTIABLE COMMITMENT TO AFRICA VIEW THE "ABOUT US" LINK ON THIS SITE:

  http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/01/31/obamas-...

  Reply

  9 Replies

  • 0%

    jordan116 months, 2 weeks ago

    Stop your yelling.

    Reply
  • 0%

    IAmMine6 months, 2 weeks ago

    this is some of the stupidest things I have ever read. With that kind of reasoning you could come up with all kinds of BS about anyone's church or religious affiliation...

    How much you getting paid by the Hillary Camp?

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      Candida6 months, 2 weeks ago

      IAmMine: "How much you getting paid by the Hillary Camp?"

      Or by someone else.

      .

      MilitaryWi...

      I hope you plan to copy an paste this nonsense into every single thread about Obama, not just the two you've already pasted it in.

      Reply
  • 0%

    Sandokan6 months, 2 weeks ago

    Go Lady tell it like it is. Yell it to the mountain!!!

    Reply
  • 0%

    baltogirl6 months, 2 weeks ago

    that is my fear with this fella getting into office, I have nothing against religion but its a personal thing and should not be fourced onto others, just like issues in another country are not our problem we have enough issues of our own to deal with here. I believe there were 75 homeless people died in 2007 in Baltimore. why? where is the help for these people, these american people. I have no issues with any race, I date outside my race. I just hope if this fella gets into office he dont use the race thing against no one. I say if your american you should help out the americans.....

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      cushi6 months, 2 weeks ago

      His church is not our government! I do hope you recognize you are talking about to separate entities. Why would you or anyone assume that because he is interested in supporting Africa, the birthplace of civilization, he would "force" the entire country to follow suit? Do you honestly think he could or would be allowed to get away with that? It's amazing how much unfounded fears can cause people to become irrational!

      If you haven't been concerned about "race" with other candidates, why are you concerned about it with him? It's your issue, not his.

      Having stated the obvious, what the heck is wrong with supporting Africa, the mother of all humanity and a continent who's resources are being plundered and pilfered unmercifully while other countries ignore its plight or apply bandages to its gaping wounds?

      Reply
    • 0%

      IcCaRus6 months, 2 weeks ago

      "I say if your american you should help out the americans"

      i agree, too bad Bush didnt give a d@mn about helping out americans. unless of course they were on the forbes list, or a fortune 500 corporation.

      Reply
  • 0%

    Candida6 months, 2 weeks ago

    MilitaryWi...

    I've read one of the articles for which you'd posted a link, and it's pure garbage. It tries to link Obama to Kenyan politics not by what he has done or said but by what they have done or said. The only potentially factual information about Obama in the whole article is that he talked to his cousin on the phone. Even that is dubious though. So what if he has? Don't you talk to your cousins? That doesn't mean that he is planning a military intervention. The whole article is just innuendo without any facts to back up anything.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      Radiofreeeuropa6 months, 2 weeks ago

      A remarkable ignorance of any critical thinking. There is one straw man and non sequitur fallacy after another. I'm not even going to bring up what seems to be behind your dislike for the man.

      Reply
• 0%

  MilitaryWifeVote4HillaryClinton6 months, 2 weeks ago

  I don't see how Obama's "I've been against the War from the Start" even can Factor in. After all, he was NOT in the Senate when the vote went down At the Start of the Invasion of Iraq.. so Technically he can't Say how He WOULD HAVE voted.

  People need to realize, this person stretches the Truth alot.

  People need to ask him about his ties to Kenya and how there is always that small chance he will pull troops out of Iraq, and send them there. There is Always that possibility.

  We need a President who Will be more set on Fixing America, instead of having Priorities anywhere else.

  Hillary Clinton will be the Best Candidate for the Job.

  Here are some Links to help you Understand about Obama and his Priority to Africa and His Ties to Kenya:

  ABOUT OBAMA'S TIES TO AFRICA:

  http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/01/31/obamas-...

  VIEW THE "ABOUT US" LINK ON THIS SITE:

  http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/01/31/obamas-...

  Reply

  37 Replies

  • 0%

    moribull6 months, 2 weeks ago

    I completely agree with you. Obama came from nowhere, and after a few colorful preacher-like empty speeches, some dudes in the Democratic Party want to give him a free pass to the US presidency.

    How do we know that he was against the Iraq war from the beginning? Indeed he was not in the US senate when that vote was done. To whom did he tell that he was against that war? To his wife? To his friend of 20 years Tony Rezko? To his attorney? To his pets? Frankly, how do we know that??? If he cannot clearly prove that he was against this war from the beginning, then he has no right to criticize Hillary; the same thing holds for all the dudes out there who put him on pedestal while bashing Hillary.

    Reply

    23 Replies

    • 0%

      Neophile6 months, 2 weeks ago

      He has every right to criticize Hillary for her support of this war. If you can produce something to refute his claim that he opposed the war from the beginning then your assertion would have some merit. Otherwise you're just spreading FUD.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        Sandokan6 months, 2 weeks ago

        Yes, but he has no record of doing anything ...since he hasnt had the time in office. So how do you KNOW how he will do in the office of the President???

        ALL THE OBAMA supporters are on the bandwagon because they all have one thing in common - they're all taking a WAG - as we say in the Military.

        Reply
    • 0%

      tchef6 months, 2 weeks ago

      He came out publicly against the war while he was serving in the Illinois senate.

      Reply

      17 Replies

      • 0%

        moribull6 months, 2 weeks ago

        I want a transcript!! There is a record of that isn't it?

        Reply

        16 Replies

        • 0%

          sotiris-k6 months, 2 weeks ago

          Really you want proof? I say people that find it convenient to distort reality , to take positions that are flexible and ethically questionable in order to promote self interests and not global values , cannot handle the truth. I hope you are not like them and your request is genuine. I apologize for my tone but i will not apologize for the substance of my statement; Clinton is no better than the republicans in one vital aspect. She is hypocritical and unable to accept responsibility. She is flexible and conveniently changing position to reflect the majority opinion . And why ? Because it served much like most that happened past 2 decades a purpose. All her life has lead to this day we find ourselves now. It has been a calculated rise to the position of nomination for the presidency. There is nothing wrong with that as long as the motives are clear and uplifting serving a higher purpose . She took the position she did with respect to Iraq because it was not politically correct.

          Reply

          15 Replies

          • 0%

            sotiris-k6 months, 2 weeks ago

            To me this is a betrayal. It takes a true leader to have the courage to stand up against the trend, the paranoia of the masses that have been deluded by liars and narrow self interests into a pseudo patriotic war. There was nothing patriotic about what took place the last 5 years. It has betrayed the core of America that stands for better things than narrow groups and their money interests . And it has betrayed the military who won the war and then was exploited in the hands of a never ending inept leadership to facilitate a permanent oil crisis and all the questionable deals that a war enables. There is a time for war and a time for peace but there is a permanent never ending demand for logic!!! Where was her logic to stand up and say what she now claims .That indeed Bush abused her vote. Of course he did! What would you expect such a vote would lead to in the hands of the kind of leader we had come to know?

            Reply
          • 0%

            sotiris-k6 months, 2 weeks ago

            There is no defense regarding iraq vote. None. And yes Iraq is everything! It is about the economy, the missed opportunities, the disregard for the genuine issues, the decline of the moral of people,the deteriotation of global respect for this country. Our problems of today come down to that one decision. A person that had the courage 5 years ago to stand up against majority paranoia and explain in clear terms the reason the operation made no sense deserves our attention.

            You want proof about who did what?

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama

            Read it through the man's life. Is he a great leader? We dont know that yet . He has some qualities . And he has the correct ideas. Sometimes its all it takes . Sometimes in a great nation all it takes is for the leader to have the right positions and the people will rise up and prove true patriots through both war and peace if motivated and inspired! Sometimes all it take is for the leader to not be a calculating self serving hypocrite.

            Reply

            5 Replies

            • 0%

              Sandokan6 months, 2 weeks ago

              Your barking up the wrong tree ...sotiris ...read Gen Eric Shinseki's report to Congress ...then talk about the military.

              People like yourself always have hind sight ...where was it when the talk was about going to Irak? Where you online chatting & complaining way back then??? Or did you go downrange like the rest of us??? Please .....

              Reply

              4 Replies

              • 0%

                sotiris-k6 months, 2 weeks ago

                Where was i? Are you really prepared to hear the answer and see the proof of what i was saying online -a younger less mature but still right - version of me on march 11 2003, 2 weeks before the iraq war started?

                Well are you?

                You know there is a long abandoned stock market related trading yahoo group i once posted long before propeller or netscape blogs existed . I was younger then vivid in my statements one can witness the feelings of the time before the mistake of mar 20 2003.

                Hindsight? Not me buddy! I am no hypocrite , never were never will.

                Your answer what i was saying 2 weeks before invasion and in fact months earlier is here;

                http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/intelinve...

                Read it and then see why Obama is my friend in logic long before i even knew his name and why Clinton moreover the great presidency of her husband (minus the scandal of course that facilitated the election of someone like Bush) didnt it cut it back then and today.

                Reply
              • 0%

                Candida6 months, 2 weeks ago

                Sandokan: "People like yourself always have hind sight ...where was it when the talk was about going to Irak?"

                Millions of people around the world were on the streets protesting against the war. Not everybody judges this war from hindsight, millions were appalled by its prospect even before it started.

                Reply

                2 Replies

                • 0%

                  Mdiar6 months, 2 weeks ago

                  Only posting this as a reply to Candida because it was most convenient. This applies to the entire hindsight argument. Stop arguing about who was against it from the beginning and who was against it after the fact, please. The fact is some were for it, some against it, most who were for it changed there minds. A person has a right to do it and please, no one try to claim moral superiority for being against it from the beginning or some incredible insight into reality. The fact is those who were against it from the beginning are just as human as the rest of us on other issues. They were most assuredly wrong on some things and proven wrong in the past as much as those who were for it. I am not for Clinton at all and support Obama but I think this is a dead issue. She made a mistake even if she isn't quite admitting it. So did alot of other Senators. Obama's speech is probably a matter of public record and I've seen references to it before. (cont.)

                  Reply

                  1 Reply

                  • 0%

                    Mdiar6 months, 2 weeks ago

                    Obama is not foolish enough to assume no one will check his statements on speeches in the past, particularly on such a large issue to most people. Obama, due to his campaign and how it works (he's not corrupt etc etc), would be committing political suicide just about by lying on this when he can be honest and say he made a mistake on it and still come out looking better as Clinton is still insisting she was deceived etc etc. The fact is she did make a mistake whether she was deceived or not and needs to own up to it, but its human nature to seek a scape goat. Let it pass. I'd be more worried about where her money comes from rather then her votes on Iraq. Now she says she'd have never made them and just live with that, please. I'm sick of that issue so sorry about the rant.

                    Reply
          • 0%

            Sandokan6 months, 2 weeks ago

            Can it sotiris ...your reasoning is totally biased ...like the rest of the country who still believes to this day that Clinton was a bad President. Outside of the US ...next to JFK ...Bill Clinton was the most respected President. Fact ...not fiction.

            Look at your argumet ...Hillary is a hypocrite??? LOL ...unable to accept responsibility?

            In the face of adversity ...she stood by her husband ...according to an oath/vow she took "... for better or for worse". I'd like to see what your wife would've done.

            Oh - eveything that people do consciously ...serve a purpose ...duhhhhhhh....

            Reply

            7 Replies

            • 0%

              sotiris-k6 months, 2 weeks ago

              From the article i quoted;

              >

              References = proof.

              Reply

              2 Replies

              • 0%

                Sandokan6 months, 2 weeks ago

                factual references = proof ...

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 0%

                  sotiris-k6 months, 2 weeks ago

                  From the article i quoted;

                  Obama was an early critic of Bush administration policies on Iraq.[103] On October 2, 2002, the day Bush and Congress agreed on a joint resolution authorizing the Iraq War,[104] Obama addressed the first high-profile Chicago anti-Iraq War rally in Federal Plaza,[105] saying:

                  I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars.[106]

                  On March 17, 2003, the day Bush issued his 48-hour ultimatum to Saddam Hussein to leave Iraq before the U.S. invasion of Iraq,[107] Obama addressed the largest Chicago anti-Iraq War rally to date in Daley Plaza and told the crowd "It's not too late" to stop the war, though many demonstrators conceded that war appeared inevitable.[108]

                  References=proof.

                  Reply
            • 0%

              Klarissa6 months, 2 weeks ago

              Sotiris, you need to add these statements to his life.

              But if those measures fall short, the United States should not rule out military strikes to destroy nuclear production sites in Iran, Obama said.

              "The big question is going to be, if Iran is resistant to these pressures, including economic sanctions, which I hope will be imposed if they do not cooperate, at what point are we going to, if any, are we going to take military action?" Obama asked.

              Given the continuing war in Iraq, the United States is not in a position to invade Iran, but missile strikes might be a viable option, he said. Obama conceded that such strikes might further strain relations between the U.S. and the Arab world.

              Reply

              1 Reply

              • 0%

                sotiris-k6 months, 2 weeks ago

                Isnt it much better to take this approach? Isnt it better to maintain an alert maximally advanced technologically and logistically military ready to be used to attack any position anywhere in the planet and achieve short term results other than invading and staying a decade totally depressing financially bankrupting the system at the peril of vastly more important priorities?

                I am with Obama in this . And i think his positions on terrorism are those of a potential leader that would not hesitate to take the hard decision to strike and act on proper intelligence. This is the quality of the true leader. The ability to do what is needed at the time, achieve the short term objective at minimal cost , influence the long term trajectory of the