Barack Obama takes tougher tone today

Barack Baby:

You win Pennsylvania and Florida I will switch to you. You did not win any of the major democractic states. You won Red states and Illinois. Hillary won California, New York, New Jersey, Ohio, Michigan and Florida.

I am concerned you are becoming Michael Dukakis/John Kerry and take us all down - with you.

Yes you are right there is only one America but the Red states will still go to McCain and that is the reality.

People who, you know, say "you know" repeatedly are, you know, not too bright.

More media attention? OK, Barack, how about sitting down with some of Chicago's investigative reporters and talk about Tony Rezko? I know they'd love to hear from you!

http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/820948,CST-NWS-sweet01.article

Senator Obamas' problem isn't going to be
Senator Clinton ...his albatross will be his Syrian Godfather Rezko. He should never of hitched up his wagon to that man, and he shouldn't of allowed himself to be tempted by boy wonder Blagos' schemes.

I woke up this morning to see a fellow Highbrid Nation writer reporting that Hillary has won the Ohio and Texas primaries and how this is getting bad. And like him I feel like this battle between Obama and Hillary has went on too long and now they are in danger of hurting the party by allowing McCain to take shots at them while they are dealing with each other. Howard Dean should step in and say “Look, Obama is going to be the canidate and Hillary you can be his running mate if you choose”…I know I know that would never happen but a guy can dream right?

We've had enough of Hillary Clinton's sleazy and vindictive politics. This is why she has hardly accomplished anything while in the senate, the reason why she failed miserably with her health care plan fiasco, and shortly after Bill Clinton was President, they lost both the senate and the house. I am a Maryland Democrat and I am utterly disgusted by Hillary Clinton's politics. Hillary Clinton went all out negative on Obama and Obama unfortunately took the high road. Her negative attcks in the past have not worked in states with an education population but this was not the case this time.

It is time that the Obama campaign remind Hillary Clinton of the story about people who live in glass houses... The Clintons have been so dishonest and they have so much garbage (where's that tax return?) that it is unbelievable how her campaign has been engaging in sleazy and dishonest politics. It's time that the Obama campaign expose Hillary Clinton for who she is.

That's what I love about Obama. He can attack without getting nasty.

He needs to do more of this AND stay on message.

Good. Much as I've come to dislike Clinton since SC, I suppose she'll make Obama a stronger candidate. He needs to find the right balance to land a telling blow while not being everything he claims to dislike in politics. It's tricky, but should be doable.

Go after experience--that shouldn't have been ceded. Go after transparency and the trouble she has locating her 2006, 2005, etc tax returns--it would take me 2 minutes. Go after who can draw a contrast with McCain on foreign policy, rather than be a less-qualified echo.

I think Mr Obama was so sure that he would beat Mrs Clinton so he wasn't that worry,but now he sees what he's up ageinst,now he's thinking I better take notice and show she is bending the truth about her accomplishments.(YOU GO HILLARY)I'm voting for U.

Obama said the media has given Clinton the benefit of the doubt that she has more experience than him.

-JM

Obama's right on the mark!

Hillary has whined that the 4th estate has gone easy on Barack, but it's also gone easy on her.

What Hillary remembers as "toughness" came from the prosecutors who never got straight answers about her involvement in Whitewater and papers that SUDDENLY appeared on her desk.

We're still waiting for some answers.

Obama,, What have you accomplished???.. I do not hear to much of anything other then a great speaker.. I'm still on the fence.. The next few eeks will prove to be intresting

Obama Has An Opportunity: Show How Srong Hope Can Be.
As our history shows Americans fight for Hope and that is what other candidates don't have. They can't bring hope because they're the ones that have left us hopeless...Last night we were given an opportunity! It's time to show America how strong Hope can be. Obama represents one hope for America and one dream for Americans. Here is a video that elaborates on it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgCGMM1zx9E

Hillay is a sleeze, wait untill the republican come in with tons of her garbage, Bill and Hillary doing business with the muslims and the are calling Obama muslim. Her tax return will indict her. I can not wait to see the democrats loose. she won Texas because of the republican votes and lies on her racist ad.

Lynn Sweet is reporting today that Obama called Lorne Michael to complain about the "SNL" skit. So -- it's "complaining to the refs" (read "whining") when Hillary does it, but it's somehow OK for you to do it? It's OK for your people to pressure an editor (politico... something or another; can't remember now) to not only change the headline but also add some comments from your people?

Can only IMAGINE what you would say if Hillary had done that.

And we're still waiting for an explanation on Rezko.

What about Hillary dabbling in the coomodoties markets and coming up with profits of over 50k on a 5k investment with the crooks at Refco, who are now as many know under indictment. Hillary has more sleazy Rove type of political agenda. You want the same old, same old vote for Hillary. Do you want a virtueos and brilliant man with more legislative experience (this is a fact 17 years as first lady of Arkansas and the WH, does not count...as if picking out the WH Christmas invitations is legislative work) Oh and that UHC...who are the Pharm companies and insurance companies backing Hillary! But I am sure all of you HRC fans already know those two lobbies are always working hard for the American people. Dems are just plain dumb...which by the way is where Hillary gets most of her votes those with an HS education or less!

I am sick of people talking about Obama not winning states that are needed in Nov. That argument is bogus. Obama has had major support everywhere that Clinton has won e.g., she won TX 51-48, 48% of Dems would have wanted him. Plus he has more overall support as he is ahead in states won, the popular vote, and delegates.

Moreover, November is a hugely different race because s/he would not be splitting the democratic vote with a person who is positioned the same, ideologically. There is no reason to believe that Dems who want to vote Democratic won't just vote the nominee. Plus he gains more cross-over votes. I am not worried that Obama cannot win in Nov. People will be for or against the war; for or against universal healthcare; for or against tax cuts for the wealthy --and McCain will lose. Please stop showing your ignorance by believing that the issues in Nov. will play out the same as they have here or the ghosts of Hillary will somehow inspire half a nation to switch to Republican. Sheesh.

Navin,
She won Michigan and Florida?
No wonder she relies so heavily on idiots like you to parrot her wacky assertions!
You Clintonites are just dunce.

Fox News someone need to catch this this morning on CNN there were talking to Hilary and Barack,,, and Barack admited he is not qualified to answer the phone when it come down to be president,,,

CNN
Your morning news on this morning talking ,,, talking to Hilary & Barack about who would be better to answer that 3am old phone call,, Hilary said all the stuff that makes her qualified, ,,,which is alot,, but then they asked ,,,, All Barack Obama said,,, Hilary did not explain to him why she is qualified,,,then started to say No one is Qualified, Well To a lot of people Obama Just admited He is not Qualified,,, to be president,,, That Video clip is going out on Utube, My space all the blogging pages,, Hilary just said,,, and gave all her qualification and Obama says she has None and No one has that Qaulification,,,,,, Why Can't CNN the leader in NEWS follow up ,,, ON the Air He admits He is not qualified ,,, Maybe Msnbc new and Abrams, Or Fox news would do with this report from CNN with the admitance he is not qualified,,, CNN IS protecting OBAMAthe barack obama head quarters, ,,,,

--
Paul Valenz

"Waaah, waaah, waaah"

Obama, what a crybaby!

Navin -
Her "win" in Michigan and Florida - are not valid. His name was not on the ballot - the Dems agreed not to campaign there. Obama kept his word. Clinton did not. I realize that the voters in Fla. and MI should have a voice and it is not their fault that their states broke party rules. A fair and equitable solution should be sought - one that invloves both canadites on the ballet would be a great place to start.

For these Tony Rezko comments, answer me this why is there a picture of the Clintons and him? I don't see Hillary answering any of those questions?

The bottom line is this Obama can not win a big state, he not going to win the presidency,, No one can get the delegate they need,,, Obama it time for you to bow down,, he need to go away, Or He can be Vice President,, this way he can get on the job training, he will never make it as a leader,,, or president...

It's pretty obvious a quote is bogus when every other word is misspelled, buddy.

With the disastrous Eagleton vice-presidential nomination, I learned as a young voter what happens when a political party fails to thoroughly investigate its nominees . Now the Democratic party faces a money laundering trap, and it centers on Rita and Tony Rezko. Obama knew Tony for decades and should have known he was a political fixer for much of that time and maintained a "clout list" for appointments in Illinois.Tony's decision to purchase in his wife's Rita's name the adjoining lot to Obama's new mansion with the result that the Obama's could buy the mansion in the name of a trust, should have raised suspicions that something was amiss with Tony's finances. How could Rita, earning only $37,500 qualify for the $500,000 mortgage on the $625,00 lot, and where was she getting the down payment and closing costs. The news media has, as well. let us the public down by not publishing copies of the trust(s) that are holding title to the mansion and lot as well as mortgages and deeds of the subject transactions; by not interviewing the witnesses and notaries to the execution of these documents and the bank officials involved in the approval and drafting of the mortgages on the lot and the mansion; by not interviewing lawyers and executives for GE Credit, which had a multi-million dollar judgment for financial fraud against Tony Rezko; and by not interviewing the parties involved in the $3,5 million dollar transfer that resulted in revocation of Tony Rezko's bail.

Navin, What a silly post. After 7 years of Bush, I'll be very surprised if several Red states don't turn Blue this year. Hillary fans may wish to discount them, but that's pretty hard to justify when you look at the turnout numbers for the Democratic primaries. Besides, how many Clinton supporters in those "major Democratic states" do you think would really pick McBush over Obama? In my opinion, he can have any Clinton (or Obama) supporters who won't back the Dem winner.

I find the arguments about Rezko so ridiculous...ummm - do you remember the many, many slimeballs the Clintons were in business with over the last decade and a half? And who is honestly to know what the story is because the media often takes it out of context!
Bottom line: Obama has chosen to take the high road with his campaign, and Hillary has not - the past week is evidence of that! And the fact that we voters fall for it is a whole different article...

Has everyone forgotten the mess in Somalia that started while the Clintons were living in the White House and failed to deal with it at it's inception?

Has everyone forgotten the genocide and massacres in Rwanda (1 million dead)? Really, where were the Clintons?

Where were they during the massacres in Bosnia, and elsewhere? Was the red phone on silence, or perhaps a better guess, both were in deep sleep, and couldn't hear the phone screaming and begging for them to answer!!!!!

Of course it's possible they woke up but perhaps were thinking, as Bush appears to think, that mass killings or death by natural disasters is just part of natural selection and survival of the fittest. The Clinton's cannot and should not be talking of foreign policy "experience." On the other hand, if Mr (former) President manages to refrain from answering the red phone, Mrs (would-be) President may do something about a massacre being committed. But, I doubt that will happen, because she will have the best advice perhaps sleeping to her side!

The only thing Hillary Clinton is qualified for is acting or perhaps a stint on Extreme Makeover! Who is the real Hillary Clinton? On second thought, I don't want to know! Ever!

Several things about last nights primary results strike me as odd. HRC claims victory, but she is behind in the race by every numerical measure. She won the Texas primary by the slimmest of margins, and she is losing the Texas caucus. In fact, she has not won one state where there is a caucus. That says to me that when people are forced to sit down with each other and discuss openly who their candidate should be, they never decide it should be Hillary.

I am furious that the Clinton campaign was able to swing the vote in Texas over the last few days with its negative tactics. I'm not really mad or surprised that they stooped to that level, but I'm surprised that Texas (and Ohio) voters did not cry hypocrite at her campaign. Where are the tax returns Hillary? Has anyone ever heard of Whitewater? Are you more experienced, and what qualifies you to make that claim? Is it the fact that you have less legislative experience than Obama? Does your time as first lady of Arkansas and the US count? Were you making foreign policy decisions during those times? Were you issueing military orders then? Did you recieve national security briefings? The answer is no on every count.

I respect senator Obama for attempting to run his campaign in a more respectful way. As an Obama supporter, I have to say, I am starting to think that he should blast her out of the water with a dose of her own negative medicine. There is certainly plenty of ammo to do just that. But that would mean that senator Obama would have to compromise his ideals and alter his strategy, which is probably not wise at this point. After all, at least for me, Senator Obama represents a clear break from the partisan tactics of the past 20 years. The argument that HRC could run better against McCain is laughable. This election is the democrats to lose, and I think that if she were to be the nominee, she would mobilize such a partisan "anti-Hillary" movement that the democrats would stand a real shot of losing the presidency. That is the legacy that she (along with her husband) have created. Not to mention that in poll after poll, Obama wins vs. McCain and Hillary is at best tied. It is time for us to move past the slash and burn, winner take all politics that defined the late 80's and 90's. Senator Obama represents our chance to do just that, he has a clear track record of being able to effectively work across party lines. He has demonstrated an ability to really listen and try to compromise with those who are of differing opinions than him. He does not demonize his opponents, or try to make them look weak, or spread slanderous lies about them. This is something that we just haven't seen in major American politics in my lifetime. If we ever had a chance at changing the direction of our national discourse, Senator Obama is it. I think it would be foolish of us not to embrace this chance.

The idea that the big states are more important than the smaller ones is just ludicrous. Most of the big states Clinton has won are going to go Democratic in November no matter who the candidate is. The swing states are where the prize is and Clinton, because of the divisive "politics as usual" tactics she is more than happy to employ will not attract the independents or the new young voters Obama will. John McCain is going to be very hard to beat in these swing states because he is seen as an honorable, independent politician. If Democrats want to win this time around they better stop listening to the Clinton hype and put forward a candidate who can compete with McCain on the battlefield of character...a place totally foreign to the Clintons.

Barack, you are only beginning to understand what it means to be in politics. I hope it is a wonderful learning experience for you.

Listen, Obama is on solid ground protesting the SNL portrayal of him as a clueless yassuh-nossuh lackey. If TV can't say 'pimped out' about Chelsea, then they can't do this racist schtick either.

Clinton says she has this 35 years of experience behind her. Experience by association is all she has.

Come on people, she was the first lady! She didn't attend crisis briefings! She didn't negotiate with foreign leaders! Before that she was first lady of ARKANSAS! ARKANSAS!!!!

Experience my *&%.

Seems nice we need to make an amendment to term limits to include spouses of the President.

Barack Obama is a true leader. Insprational, experienced yet unsullied by Washington insiders.

Hopefully, Wyoming and Pennsylvania will put an end to the Clinton machine.

This statement is just wrong:

"The idea that the big states are more important than the smaller ones is just ludicrous. Most of the big states Clinton has won are going to go Democratic in November no matter who the candidate is."

What? There are MIllIONS of women and Latino voters in places like California, New York and Nevada that simply will not vote for Obama under any circumstance. Since neither Hillary or Obama can expect to carry a singly southern state losing a "safe" democratic state like California, and it's much more conservative then you think, when Hillary's coalition stays at home is more than just a possibility. It's a likelihood. The dems lost Nevada in 2004 and they're well on their way to losing that swing state by turning off voters with this year's caucus. Obama got more delegates but Clinton won the popular vote in the primary there. Without her voters it's surely Red territory. Losing California would be the death knell for any democratic hopes for the White House. Obama can deliver big state Illinois but since Clinton's from Park Ridge it's almost a certainty she could hold it, too. Nominating Obama puts Arkansas into play and further cements Texas and Florida in republican hands.

If you honestly think Obama will win Georgia, either of the Carolinas, Mississippi or Colorado I'd like some of what you're smoking.

Ha! The new attack on the messenger is that SNL is racist. Sure. Whatever, guys.

"C'mon guys, I answered like eight questions!"

Hilliary's [and Bill's] political "blue" view is myopic, too focused, and strategically narrow-minded... The Democratics will OBVIOUSLY winning those large traditional Democratic states. That don't guarantee the White House...Remember Florida, 2000?...NOT! So, who's going out there talking in those "red" states....? Obama's strategy has peripheral vision...every state is important, especially traditional "red" states. Obama is get out there with national political outreach to nail solid wins in those "red" states. Think again...Florida, 2000...NOT AGAIN!!!

Go after transparency and the trouble she has locating her 2006, 2005
Posted by: Deborah | March 5, 2008 12:12

Good idea Deborah, the only problem is he also has a transparency problem with the Rezko trial starting up he's not saying anything about his dealings with his political "Godfather" Rezko. No doubt he's worried about a perjury trap..ie saying one thing in public and something different coming out in sworn testimony. It' a slippery slope.

Thinking,

California has a republican governor with approval ratings in the '90s, a nearly equal number of "safe" conservative congressional districts in places like San Diego and the central valley. It also has a huge latino voter base that went 2-to-1 for Hillary over Obama. These are the same people that voted for her over Obama in Nevada. What makes you possibly think these people will vote for Obama after the acrimony of the last few months?

Obama can't win in the red states and he'd endanger the blue ones. Hillary is just as polarizing in the places Obama has won, but the key is those places don't have as many electoral votes as Hillary's states do.

For Obama, who was not tested when it came for the "war vote" because he wasn't in the Senate, his accomplishments are no more than Hillary's. At best, one would conclude Hillary has more tenure as a U.S. Senator whereas Obama had only two years behind him (seated in Jan. 2005; announced candidacy in Feb. 2007) before he announced his candidacy for President. His Illinois legislative experience was not exactly stellar. His desire for the highest office in the land is a bit premature. At best, he should have finished his one term as Senator.

Ambition builds nations, but it also destroys them. It is safer in these troubled times to choose practical, intelligent thought (Hillary) over starry-eyed idealism (Obama), and in doing so, change and hope will find a way without the flowery language.

To the people of the great states of Pennsylvania, Wyoming, and Mississipi, and the other remaining states, listen closely to the words, and ignore those words that deal with the abstract - hope and change, because withoutr solid ideas and plans, here can be NO HOPE AND NO CHANGE. Impressive rhetoric is fine for a creative writing or speech class, but not for the Office of the President.

Remind us again of Rezko? Let's get to know Clinton a bit better:

Convicted Pakistani bundler Ray “I'm just recalling how close I've been with the Clinton family and those nights, movies, dinners, lunches in the White House” Jinnah
http://www.caclean.org/problem/latimes_2007-04-15.php

Stuart “$30,000 in straw man donations to HillPAC” Schoenburg

Norman “I was loyal to Senator Clinton” Hsu,
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN0425676020080104

and never forget,

Peter “Three convictions ‘missed’ by Clinton campaign vetters” Paul.

While Rezko may have been under active investigation at the time of the land deal, Paul was a ***three-time convicted felon*** whose photo with both Clintons (taken AFTER his convictions) appears on FactCheck.org, which presents laughable defenses (“a politician's routine call scratching under the chin those who are knocking themselves out for her,” “The ONLY finding of anything illegal in connection with the fundraiser was the underreporting of the cost of the event by about $722,000, which resulted in a fine of $35,000”) of the Clintons on its site.

Note that Obama said that he always calls HRC after her victories. In his concession speeches he also acknowledges her victory. After his victories, she did not acknowledge his in her speech.

Jeff, Maybe in some drug-induced Republican fantasy world the Democratic voters in California and New York will chose McBush over Obama. More war, more corruption, and less jobs is such a persuasive platform after all.

Face it. Obama will crush McCain. Even Hillary would win, but she's a much more divisive figure and she isn't going to win any of the remaining states by a big enough margin to overcome Obama's lead.

The Clintons got a lot of cash from the Saudi Arabian officials. NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT IT. What about the Monica scandal? How is her husband going to behave in the white house? He may be having sexual sessions in the Oval office when his wife in the Boardroom. There is such a baggage with the Clintons. The nation does not trust them because they look straight in your eyes and lie. Come on guys, does Americahas to endure these? Obama 08.

for all of those who are hi-lighting Hillary's streak of Blue-State victories as opposed to Mr. Obama's streak of Red-State victories: Blue wasn't always Blue, and Red wasn't always Red.
also, check the McCain/Obama national polls. not too grim for Obama, in fact more so for Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton is making statements that embellish the resume of Senator Mc Cain.Yet, let's face it, she will not be able to beat him on national security issues.Senator Obama is the first democratic nominee in a long time with the ability to win red States.With his coattails,the democrats could sweep the house and the senate.Clinton is not capable of such success.This independent will do whatever he can to help Obama get elected. However, if it's Mrs Clinton-may God be with them- Iknow many voters who wouldn't.

Hillary is just continuing to show how much more she cares just about being nominated rather than having a core message. I feel her campaign is echoing Kerry's from 2004 "I'm not George Bush", except Hillary's is "I'm not Barack Obama."

Eventually people are going to tire of hearing Hillary continuously attack Barack Obama and they're gonna want to hear about the issues. When was the last time Hillary spoke about healthcare, the economy (excluding debates) without attacking Obama? And we have Obama who has remained positive every time he gives a speech, and he hasn't negatively spoken about Hillary, because he wants to maintain a positive campaign, which is definitely one of the signs of running a successful campaign.

Obama ruined his own polical life. He ran for President in the wrong country. He needs to run for President where he and his wife have alligance---I believe that is Arfica. After his betrayal Of America values they need to just leave, only the people they have flattered will miss them.

First of all no one has won the big states. They each won a portion of the big states and there was not a significant spread between the two with respect to votes. So, this whole idea of Hilliary winning big states is a farce. Only Republicans win whole states. Democrats have chosen a proportional system. Second, the states that are considered the big Democratic States will go to any Democratic with a reasonable reputation. What is needed is someone who can compete in the Red States and who can pick up votes there even if they do not win all of them. Hilliary can't even made inroads in those areas.