Gallup: Obama lead over Clinton largest this year

Are these the same pollsters who did such a great job predicting New Hampshire?
I usually get called a lot for polling--not ONE phone call this year.
Also--gallup polls ain't how we pick a prez.
Heard of the electoral college?
Also--what's the margin of error for this 'poll?'
What questions were asked? We have a right to know this.
Just more media hackery--hoping to profit from a prolonged dem primary campaign.
shameful.

You can always trust the American people to finally figure things out...well not for the last seven years but...

p.s. I'm glad this Hillary debacle is almost over and we can get on with the job of showing John McCain for what he is. An out of step old fossil.

Clinton has to stay in this race, she has to continue getting campaign donations from her supporters in order to pay off all of the self-made Clinton campaign debts.

"Cash-strapped Clinton fails to pay bills"
By: Kenneth P. Vogel- Politico
March 30, 2008 11:38 AM EST

Hillary Rodham Clinton’s cash-strapped presidential campaign has been putting off paying hundreds of bills for months — freeing up cash for critical media buys but also earning the campaign a reputation as something of a deadbeat in some small-business circles.

A pair of Ohio companies owed more than $25,000 by Clinton for staging events for her campaign are warning others in the tight-knit event production community — and anyone else who will listen — to get their cash upfront when doing business with her. Her campaign, say representatives of the two companies, has stopped returning phone calls and e-mails seeking payment of outstanding invoices. One even got no response from a certified letter.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9259.html

"Is Hillary broke"?
March 29, 2008
BY MICHAEL SNEED Sun-Times Columnist

Scoop du jour? Sneed hears major money problems in the Clinton camp may soon become a coroner knocking on her campaign door.

To wit: Word is the cash feeding into Hillary Clinton's campaign coffers has not only slowed down in a big way, undisclosed campaign debts that have yet to be made public could signal the end and have insiders biting their nails.

"Hillary needs to raise money to stay alive," a top Dem source said.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/sneed/865494,CST-NWS-SNEED28.article

As long as Hillary has a remote chance, she should stay in. The truth about Obama is only just now beginning to come out. See:
http://miraclesdaily.blogspot.com/

STORY BEHIND THE CLINTON MYTH

One big fact has largely been lost in the recent coverage of the Democratic presidential race: Hillary Rodham Clinton has virtually no chance of winning.

Her own campaign acknowledges there is no way that she will finish ahead in pledged delegates. That means the only way she wins is if Democratic super delegates are ready to risk a backlash of historic proportions from the party's most reliable constituency.

Unless Clinton is able to at least win the primary popular vote -- which also would take nothing less than an electoral miracle -- and use that achievement to pressure super delegates, she has only one scenario for victory. An African-American opponent and his backers would be told that, even though he won the contest with voters, the prize is going to someone else.

People who think that scenario is even remotely likely are living on another planet.

As it happens, many people inside Clinton's campaign live right here on Earth. One important Clinton adviser estimated to Politico privately that she has no more than a 10 percent chance of winning her race against Barack Obama, an appraisal that was echoed by other operatives.

In other words: The notion of the Democratic contest being a dramatic cliffhanger is a game of make-believe.

Politico's top editors draw on their experience at the nation's largest news organizations to pull back the curtain on coverage decisions and the media mindset.

Journalists have become partners with the Clinton campaign in pretending that the contest is closer than it really is. Most coverage breathlessly portrays the race as a down-to-the-wire sprint between two well-matched candidates, one only slightly better situated than the other to win in August at the national convention in Denver.

One reason is fear of embarrassment. In its zeal to avoid predictive reporting of the sort that embarrassed journalists in New Hampshire, the media -- including Politico -- have tended to avoid zeroing in on the tough math Clinton faces.

Avoiding predictions based on polls even before voters cast their ballots is wise policy. But that's not the same as drawing sober and well-grounded conclusions about the current state of a race after millions of voters have registered their preferences.

The antidote to last winter's flawed predictions is not to promote a misleading narrative based on the desired but unlikely story line of one candidate.

There are other forces also working to preserve the notion of a contest that is still up for grabs.

One important, if subliminal, reason is self-interest. Reporters and editors love a close race -- it's more fun and it's good for business.

The media are also enamored of the almost mystical ability of the Clintons to work their way out of tight jams, as they have done for 16 years at the national level. That explains why some reporters are inclined to believe the Clinton campaign when it talks about how she's going to win on the third ballot at the Democratic National Convention in August.

That's certainly possible -- and, to be clear, we'd love to see the race last that long -- but it's folly to write about this as if it is likely.

It's also hard to overstate the role the talented Clinton camp plays in shaping the campaign narrative, first by subtly lowering the bar for the performance necessary to remain in the race, and then by keeping the focus on Obama's relationships with a political fixer and a controversial pastor in Illinois.

But even some of Clinton's own advisers now concede that she cannot win unless Obama is hit by a political meteor. Something that merely undermines him won't be enough. It would have to be some development that essentially disqualifies him.

Simple number-crunching has shown the long odds against Clinton for some time.

In the latest Associated Press delegate count, Obama leads with 1,406 pledged delegates to Clinton's 1,249. Obama's lead is likely to grow, as it did with county conventions last weekend in Iowa, as later rounds of delegates are apportioned from caucuses he has already won.

The Democratic Party has 794 super delegates, the party insiders who get to vote on the nomination in addition to the delegates chosen by voters.
According to Politico's latest tally, Clinton has 250 and Obama has 212.
That means 261 are uncommitted, and 71 have yet to be named.

An analysis by Politico's Avi Zenilman shows that Clinton's lead in super delegates has shrunk by about 60 in the past month. And it found Clinton is roughly tied among House members, senators and governors -- the party's most powerful elite.

Clinton had not announced a new super delegate commitment since the March 4 primaries, until the drought was broken recently by Rep. John P. Murtha
(D-Pa.) and West Virginia committeeman Pat Maroney.

Clintonistas continue to talk tough. Phil Singer, the Clinton campaign's deputy communications director, told reporters on a conference call Friday that the Obama campaign "is in hot water" and is "seeing the ground shift away from them."

Mark Penn, the campaign's chief strategist, maintained that it's still "a hard-fought race between two potential nominees" and that other factors could come into play at the convention besides the latest delegate tally -- "the popular vote, who will have won more delegates from primaries [as opposed to caucuses], who will be the stronger candidate against McCain."

But let's assume a best-case scenario for Clinton, one where she wins every remaining contest with 60 percent of the vote (an unlikely outcome since she has hit that level in only three states so far -- her home state of New York, Rhode Island and Arkansas).

Even then, she would still be behind Obama in delegates.

There are 566 pledged delegates up for grabs in upcoming contests. Those delegates come from Pennsylvania (158), Guam (4) North Carolina (115), Indiana (72), West Virginia (28), Kentucky (51), Oregon (52), Puerto Rico (55), Montana (16) and South Dakota (15).

If Clinton won 60 percent of those delegates, she would get 340 delegates to Obama's 226. Under that scenario -- and without revote in Michigan and Florida -- Obama would still lead in delegates by 1,632 to 1,589.

The only remote possibility of a win in delegates would come if revote were held in Florida and Michigan -- which, again, would take a political miracle.
If Clinton won 60 percent of the delegates in both states, she would win 188 delegates and Obama would win 125. Clinton would then lead among pledged delegates, 1,777 to 1,757.

The other elephant in the room for Clinton is that Obama is almost certain to win North Carolina, with its high percentage of African-American voters, and also is seen as extremely strong in Oregon.

Harold Ickes, an icon of the Democratic Party who is Clinton's chief delegate strategist, points out that every previous forecast about this race has been faulty.

Asked about the Obama campaign's contention that it's mathematically impossible for Clinton to win, Ickes replied: "They can't count. At the end of it, even by the Obama campaign's prediction, neither candidate will have enough delegates to be nominated."

This is true, as a matter of math. But even the Clinton campaign's own best-case scenario has her finishing behind Obama when all the nominating contests are over.

"She will be close to him but certainly not equal to him in pledged delegates," a Clinton adviser said. "When you add the super delegates on top of it, I'll think she'll still be behind him somewhat in total delegates -- but very, very close."

The total gap is likely to be 75 to 110, the adviser said.

That means Clinton would need either some of those pledged delegates to switch their support -- which technically they can do, though it would be unlikely -- or for the white-dominated group of super delegates to join forces with her to topple Obama.

To foster doubt about Obama, Clinton supporters are using a whisper and pressure campaign to make an 11th-hour argument to party insiders that he would be a weak candidate in November despite his superior standing at the moment.

"All she has left is the electability argument," a Democratic official said.
"It's all wrapped around: Is there something that makes him ultimately unelectable?"

But the audience for that argument, the super delegates, will not easily overturn the will of the party's voters. And in fact, a number of heavyweight Democrats are looking at the landscape and laying the groundwork to dissuade Clinton from trying to overturn the will of the party rank and file.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who has not endorsed either candidate, appears to be among them. She told Bloomberg Television that super delegates should "respect for what has been said by the people." And she told ABC's "This Week" that it would be "harmful to the Democratic Party" if super delegates overturn the outcome of elections.

A Democratic strategist said that given the unlikelihood of prevailing any other way, Clinton now must "scare" super delegates "who basically just want to win."

The strategist said Clinton aides are now relying heavily on the controversy over Obama's retiring minister, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, to sow new seeds of doubt.

"This issue is the first thing that's come along that I think is potentially fatal to his electability argument," the strategist said.

"They're looking ahead and saying: Is it possible this thing is just going to drip, drip, drip, drip -- more video? Where does that leave us if he's our presumptive nominee and he's limping into the convention and the Republicans are just ready to go on him, double-barreled?"

The strategist also said Clinton's agents are making more subtle pitches.

"I've heard people start to say: Have you looked at the vote in Ohio really carefully? See how that breaks down for him. What does that portend?" said the strategist. "Then they point to Pennsylvania: In electoral important battleground states, if he is essentially only carrying heavy African-American turnout in high-performing African-American districts and the Starbucks-sipping, Volvo-driving liberal elite, how does he carry a state like Pennsylvania?"

Her advisers say privately that the nominee will be clear by the end of June. At the same time, they recognize that the nominee probably is clear already.

What has to irk Clintons' aides is that they felt she might finally have him on the ropes, bruised badly by the Wright fight and wobbly in polls. But the bell rang long ago in the minds of too many voters.

Geraldinetoo,

Give it a rest, bruce, you pathetic whiner. You were given the link to the poll, find out the particulars yourself and STFU.

STORY BEHIND THE CLINTON MYTH

One big fact has largely been lost in the recent coverage of the Democratic presidential race: Hillary Rodham Clinton has virtually no chance of winning.

Her own campaign acknowledges there is no way that she will finish ahead in pledged delegates. That means the only way she wins is if Democratic super delegates are ready to risk a backlash of historic proportions from the party's most reliable constituency.

Unless Clinton is able to at least win the primary popular vote -- which also would take nothing less than an electoral miracle -- and use that achievement to pressure super delegates, she has only one scenario for victory. An African-American opponent and his backers would be told that, even though he won the contest with voters, the prize is going to someone else.

People who think that scenario is even remotely likely are living on another planet.

As it happens, many people inside Clinton's campaign live right here on Earth. One important Clinton adviser estimated to Politico privately that she has no more than a 10 percent chance of winning her race against Barack Obama, an appraisal that was echoed by other operatives.

In other words: The notion of the Democratic contest being a dramatic cliffhanger is a game of make-believe.

Politico's top editors draw on their experience at the nation's largest news organizations to pull back the curtain on coverage decisions and the media mindset.

Journalists have become partners with the Clinton campaign in pretending that the contest is closer than it really is. Most coverage breathlessly portrays the race as a down-to-the-wire sprint between two well-matched candidates, one only slightly better situated than the other to win in August at the national convention in Denver.

One reason is fear of embarrassment. In its zeal to avoid predictive reporting of the sort that embarrassed journalists in New Hampshire, the media -- including Politico -- have tended to avoid zeroing in on the tough math Clinton faces.

Avoiding predictions based on polls even before voters cast their ballots is wise policy. But that's not the same as drawing sober and well-grounded conclusions about the current state of a race after millions of voters have registered their preferences.

The antidote to last winter's flawed predictions is not to promote a misleading narrative based on the desired but unlikely story line of one candidate.

There are other forces also working to preserve the notion of a contest that is still up for grabs.

One important, if subliminal, reason is self-interest. Reporters and editors love a close race -- it's more fun and it's good for business.

The media are also enamored of the almost mystical ability of the Clintons to work their way out of tight jams, as they have done for 16 years at the national level. That explains why some reporters are inclined to believe the Clinton campaign when it talks about how she's going to win on the third ballot at the Democratic National Convention in August.

That's certainly possible -- and, to be clear, we'd love to see the race last that long -- but it's folly to write about this as if it is likely.

It's also hard to overstate the role the talented Clinton camp plays in shaping the campaign narrative, first by subtly lowering the bar for the performance necessary to remain in the race, and then by keeping the focus on Obama's relationships with a political fixer and a controversial pastor in Illinois.

But even some of Clinton's own advisers now concede that she cannot win unless Obama is hit by a political meteor. Something that merely undermines him won't be enough. It would have to be some development that essentially disqualifies him.

Simple number-crunching has shown the long odds against Clinton for some time.

In the latest Associated Press delegate count, Obama leads with 1,406 pledged delegates to Clinton's 1,249. Obama's lead is likely to grow, as it did with county conventions last weekend in Iowa, as later rounds of delegates are apportioned from caucuses he has already won.

The Democratic Party has 794 super delegates, the party insiders who get to vote on the nomination in addition to the delegates chosen by voters.
According to Politico's latest tally, Clinton has 250 and Obama has 212.
That means 261 are uncommitted, and 71 have yet to be named.

An analysis by Politico's Avi Zenilman shows that Clinton's lead in super delegates has shrunk by about 60 in the past month. And it found Clinton is roughly tied among House members, senators and governors -- the party's most powerful elite.

Clinton had not announced a new super delegate commitment since the March 4 primaries, until the drought was broken recently by Rep. John P. Murtha
(D-Pa.) and West Virginia committeeman Pat Maroney.

Clintonistas continue to talk tough. Phil Singer, the Clinton campaign's deputy communications director, told reporters on a conference call Friday that the Obama campaign "is in hot water" and is "seeing the ground shift away from them."

Mark Penn, the campaign's chief strategist, maintained that it's still "a hard-fought race between two potential nominees" and that other factors could come into play at the convention besides the latest delegate tally -- "the popular vote, who will have won more delegates from primaries [as opposed to caucuses], who will be the stronger candidate against McCain."

But let's assume a best-case scenario for Clinton, one where she wins every remaining contest with 60 percent of the vote (an unlikely outcome since she has hit that level in only three states so far -- her home state of New York, Rhode Island and Arkansas).

Even then, she would still be behind Obama in delegates.

There are 566 pledged delegates up for grabs in upcoming contests. Those delegates come from Pennsylvania (158), Guam (4) North Carolina (115), Indiana (72), West Virginia (28), Kentucky (51), Oregon (52), Puerto Rico (55), Montana (16) and South Dakota (15).

If Clinton won 60 percent of those delegates, she would get 340 delegates to Obama's 226. Under that scenario -- and without revote in Michigan and Florida -- Obama would still lead in delegates by 1,632 to 1,589.

The only remote possibility of a win in delegates would come if revote were held in Florida and Michigan -- which, again, would take a political miracle.
If Clinton won 60 percent of the delegates in both states, she would win 188 delegates and Obama would win 125. Clinton would then lead among pledged delegates, 1,777 to 1,757.

The other elephant in the room for Clinton is that Obama is almost certain to win North Carolina, with its high percentage of African-American voters, and also is seen as extremely strong in Oregon.

Harold Ickes, an icon of the Democratic Party who is Clinton's chief delegate strategist, points out that every previous forecast about this race has been faulty.

Asked about the Obama campaign's contention that it's mathematically impossible for Clinton to win, Ickes replied: "They can't count. At the end of it, even by the Obama campaign's prediction, neither candidate will have enough delegates to be nominated."

This is true, as a matter of math. But even the Clinton campaign's own best-case scenario has her finishing behind Obama when all the nominating contests are over.

"She will be close to him but certainly not equal to him in pledged delegates," a Clinton adviser said. "When you add the super delegates on top of it, I'll think she'll still be behind him somewhat in total delegates -- but very, very close."

The total gap is likely to be 75 to 110, the adviser said.

That means Clinton would need either some of those pledged delegates to switch their support -- which technically they can do, though it would be unlikely -- or for the white-dominated group of super delegates to join forces with her to topple Obama.

To foster doubt about Obama, Clinton supporters are using a whisper and pressure campaign to make an 11th-hour argument to party insiders that he would be a weak candidate in November despite his superior standing at the moment.

"All she has left is the electability argument," a Democratic official said.
"It's all wrapped around: Is there something that makes him ultimately unelectable?"

But the audience for that argument, the super delegates, will not easily overturn the will of the party's voters. And in fact, a number of heavyweight Democrats are looking at the landscape and laying the groundwork to dissuade Clinton from trying to overturn the will of the party rank and file.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who has not endorsed either candidate, appears to be among them. She told Bloomberg Television that super delegates should "respect for what has been said by the people." And she told ABC's "This Week" that it would be "harmful to the Democratic Party" if super delegates overturn the outcome of elections.

A Democratic strategist said that given the unlikelihood of prevailing any other way, Clinton now must "scare" super delegates "who basically just want to win."

The strategist said Clinton aides are now relying heavily on the controversy over Obama's retiring minister, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, to sow new seeds of doubt.

"This issue is the first thing that's come along that I think is potentially fatal to his electability argument," the strategist said.

"They're looking ahead and saying: Is it possible this thing is just going to drip, drip, drip, drip -- more video? Where does that leave us if he's our presumptive nominee and he's limping into the convention and the Republicans are just ready to go on him, double-barreled?"

The strategist also said Clinton's agents are making more subtle pitches.

"I've heard people start to say: Have you looked at the vote in Ohio really carefully? See how that breaks down for him. What does that portend?" said the strategist. "Then they point to Pennsylvania: In electoral important battleground states, if he is essentially only carrying heavy African-American turnout in high-performing African-American districts and the Starbucks-sipping, Volvo-driving liberal elite, how does he carry a state like Pennsylvania?"

Her advisers say privately that the nominee will be clear by the end of June. At the same time, they recognize that the nominee probably is clear already.

What has to irk Clintons' aides is that they felt she might finally have him on the ropes, bruised badly by the Wright fight and wobbly in polls. But the bell rang long ago in the minds of too many voters.

Hillary will NEVER release her tax information. She will DELAY and DELAY. Just wait and see.

Here we go with the excuses again:

Clinton supporteers will say: POLLS DONT MATTER!

Obama supporters will say: Im glad people are starting to see the REAL Hillary

I think the truth is many registered voters dont hate or love either of the candidates as much as us armchair pundits do and see that Hillary's time is coming to an end and they want to move on.

Also her attacks (although fair in my view eventhough Im an Obama supporter) make her look less humanand more coniving and just fall into the Clinton stereotype.

People just want her to move on and try again in 2012 if Obama loses.

the best comment I have heard, so far, in this campaign, is a reference to her, not as a candidate, nor woman, but, as a, "thing" that nobody should vote for.

I want Hillary to stay until after all the primary elections are over. I don't want to listen to her whine all the way to the convention that Obama has circumvented the democratic process and denied "All her people" their right to choose. Oh wait, I forgot. She wants to contest it long after that when the credentials committee doesn't seat Michigan and Florida, her states. Another Obama consipracy to steal the election from her. Compose yourself Hillary. Maybe Bill can get you a job checking in books at the return desk in his library. You won't need to wear a flak jacket on that job.

Hillary Clinton has the right to stay in this race as long as it takes to cast her family legacy down the well. At this point she has turned this into a credibility/beauty contest for superdelegates because she knows she cannot win by any other stretch. She will go to any length to bend the rules her way and damage the party in Nov. while denying her own supporters honesty and transparency.

At this stage in the campaign for democratic nominee race, Hillary Clinton will do a great service if she were to take the magnanimous action of endorsing Barack Obama as the Democratic nominee for white house. This will greatly enhance her prestige across the nation going forward.

Maybe America is ready for some open honesty. Maybe if Hilary went about her campaign as a down-to-earth, honest-to-goodness human being versus the hate-spewing, desperately lying poli-trick-cian she has managed to portray herself as, she might have clinched it back on supertuesday. And her most recent lies of "landing under hostile fire," (claims disputed by everyone else at the scene) are supposedly excused as mistakes made under the claim of campaign pressures...if she cracks under campaign pressure, how will she handle it when faced with the presidential pressure of the most important office in America? In the end, Barack won't be the one to do her in; her own insecurities will.

Its really stupid to see country like USA is dying for two families BUSH, CLINTON and whats even PITY is both are such scumbags (SEX, LIES, TERROR, $6 GAS, 8% APR). One busted Tech economy and the other busted Housing economy.

CLINTON'S PLAN:

1. SENATE to Hillary in exchange for White House S3X

2. 2000, Al Gore was not supported enough by Bill as he is TOO BUSY Cooking a VICTORY for Hillary in exchange for White House S3X

3. 2001, Hillary VOTED for WAR so Bush gets backlash on WAR latter which is usual and can be used for herself

4. 2004, Kerry was not supported early by Clinton or his Wing as Billary had plans for 2008 which succeed only if Bush wins

5. 2008, Billary tried hard and CONCEDED a loss but not PUBLICLY. The plan is to make sure McS(h)ame get the Win so she has 2012 full secured chance as Failure of "YES WE CAN" means Voters of RACES,REGIONS,PARTIES will loose faith and not turnout to vote.

AFTER ALL, THAT IS CLINTON.

Bright side of the story is, if You don't see OBAMA, VOTE McS(h)ame so you don't need to be ASHAMED OF in front of WORLD like BUSH made you.

PLEASE VOTE McS(h)ame for:

1. $6 GAS to each VOTER
2. 100 Years of IRAQ WAR ~ 100,000 Navy Lives 10 Million IRAQIs
3. IRAN WAR
4. AGAIN SETTING UP Dictator rule PAKISTAN
5. Manufacture more DRUGS in AFGHAN and sell to VOTER's KIDS
6. $4 MILK
7. $3 EGGS
8. HOSTILE TAKEOVERS of many COPORATIONS by more ARAB FUNDED COMPANIES
9. LOOSING more CIVIL RIGHTS
10. BURNING MORE WHITE HOUSE DOCUMENTS which are Proofs
11. Terror Planning more of 9/11, Madrid, etc.
12. Again Yellow,Orange,Red Threat Levels in FOX NEWS
13. Releasing Bin Ladens Tapes week before they need FEARED KITTENS
14. AMERICAN IN CLOSET and there will be hardly any country left which is safe for American. A century back, the same American is much respected even in very same Pakistan, Iraq, Iran.
15. Yet, Evengelicals wants to VOTE and eat Bread soaked in BLOOD of Navy and Iraqis.

OFCOURSE, SHE DOES NOT EVEN BELIEVE THAT LEADER CAN CHANGE COURSE WITH WARNINGS BUT NOT LIE LIE LIE like she is doing on every aspect:
Monica's
Bosnia
NAFTA
Dream-Ticket
Super-Deligates
Pledged-Deligates
IRAQ WAR VOTE
ITALY PEACE.
Falling Back on Wright
Falling back on FL, MI
Not Telling TRUTH to Chelsey about how she let Bill have PLEASURES in front of her.

Of course Clinton's Bosnia tale would have a strong negative effect--HRC's lying or “misspeaking” constitutes a recognizable pattern, and reminds many of the cr*p from the previous Clinton administration.

What’s truly bizarre, though, is that HRC risks lying about “dumb” stuff. She must think she won’t get caught, although when she does get caught, she seems to casually shrug off her “misstatements.” It’s bizarre, almost pathological.

Here are three dumb lies that beg the question: Why would she lie about this relatively inconsequential stuff? And what does that say about her ability to tell the truth about difficult matters?

***Appearing on NBC's DATELINE, Sen. Clinton told Jane Pauley that Chelsea was around the World Trade Center on the morning of Sept. 11th:

"She had gone on what she thought would be a great jog," Hillary Clinton explained. "She was going down to Battery Park, she was going to go around the towers. She was going to get a cup of coffee and - that's when the plane hit!"

Hillary's dramatic story about her daughter's close call with the Twin Towers became a media sensation. "At that moment, she was not just a Senator, but a concerned parent," TODAY show's Katie Couric told viewers on 9/18/2001.
TRUTH: In the Dec/Jan 2002 issue of TALK magazine, Chelsea wrote that she was staying at a friend’s apt in Union Square, 12 blocks away. Her friend called with news about the first plane crashing into the WTC. Chelsea turned on the TV and watched the second plane crash.
"I stared senselessly at the television," Chelsea writes.

****Hillary started claiming she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary after she met him in 1995. Bill Clinton even included this “true” story in his 2004 autobiography. Thing is, HRC was born in 1947, and Edmund Hillary didn’t conquer Mt. Everest until 1953, when HRC was 6 years old.
TRUTH: In October 2006, a campaign aide finally admitted it was not true after all, that it was just a “sweet family story that her mother told her to inspire greatness.” This sweet story, however, had never before been mentioned anywhere.

***On numerous other occasions, including in her Iowa stump speech, Clinton has said, "We used to say in the White House that if a place is too dangerous, too small or too poor, send the First Lady." And that lead to her being sent to Bosnia and coming under sniper fire.
TRUTH: Well, now we know.

Actually, what hasn’t been covered much are her cascading excuses or “misstatements” about this Bosnia tale, culminating in her saying this to KDKA radio in Pittsburgh on 3/25/08:
“I have written about this and described in many different settings and I did misspeak the other day,” Clinton said during a live 10-minute interview. “This has been a very long campaign….Last week for the first time in 12 years or so, I misspoke.”

Bizarro. No wonder Obama's lead has grown. It's a wonder it's not even bigger.

Why isn't Hillary being vetted over her taxes that she hasn't disclosed yet? Why isn't her "church" getting vetted? Why does she still have more superdelegates when Obama has more pledged delegates? He should have at least as many superdelegates as she does. Why can't they man up and woman up to pledge their support? Don't be afraid of being called "Judas" because HILLARY AND BILL are the JUDADes when they ENDORSED John McCain and said he would be a BETTER CANDIDATE and the only other candidate besides HIllary that LOVED their country - how dare they call anyone else Judas?

OBAMA LIES IN PENNSYLVANIA AD
From NBC/NJ’s Aswini Anburajan
GREENBURG, Pa. -- The Clinton campaign today accused the Obama campaign of "false advertising," claiming that a recent ad Obama released in Pennsylvania was disngenous because Obama has been the recipient of more than $200,000 from the oil and gas industry.
In the ad, Obama says, "I'm Barack Obama, and I don't take money from oil companies or lobbyists, and I won't let them block change any more."
Obama has taken $213,884 from the oil and gas industry as of Feb. 29th, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Sen. Hillary Clinton has taken $306,813 in that same period.
Two of Obama's campaign bundlers are also CEOs for oil and gas companies, per a list released on his campaign Web site.
Robert Cavnar, listed as a bundler who has raised between $50,000 to $100,000 for the campaign, is the chairman and CEO of Mission Resources Corp., a Houston-based firm. George Kaiser, also listed in the same $50,000 to $100,000 category, is the CEO of Tulsa-based Kaiser-Francis Oil Company.
"It's unfortunate that Senator Obama is using false advertising to explain why he can be trusted to do something about energy prices," Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said. "Senator Obama says he doesn't take campaign contributions from oil companies but the reality is that Exxon, Shell, and others are among his donors."
http://tinyurl.com/2on6dr

This Gallup is complete BS.And this is the mass media created BS-Gallup.Obama must drop out and this is obvious.Go Hillary!!!

OBAMA WILL NOT COOPERATE IN RELEASING 8 YEARS OF HIS STATE SENATE RECORDS
Judicial Watch: Obama ‘intended to leave no paper trail’
By Klaus Marre
Posted: 03/26/08 01:01 PM [ET]
The president of a prominent watchdog group said Wednesday that he believes Democratic presidential frontrunner Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) “intended to leave no paper trail” during his time in the Illinois Senate.



Judicial Watch, which has been seeking access to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (D-N.Y.) records from her time in the White House, argued Wednesday that the Illinois senator, who has criticized the former first lady for a lack of openness, has his own “records problem.”
“The more we learn about the Illinois Senator, the more obvious it becomes that he is anything but the ethically upright outsider he purports to be,” said Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch.
The group rose to prominence when it repeatedly took on former President Bill Clinton during his time in office. It also sought records from the Bush administration regarding Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force.
In a statement, Fitton noted that his group has sought access to Obama’s records as a state senator and questioned whether the presidential candidate has been forthcoming with regard to what happened to those documents.
He said that “nobody knows where they are, if they exist at all” and claimed that “Obama’s story keeps changing.”

I think Hillary should make me a sandwich.

Hot Pastrami on rye, if you please, Hil !

Polls dom't mean nothing..
what means a lot is when the evangelicals get pissed or they feel scared and attacked...like with the blaster pastor Wright, Barrack Huesin Obamas' black phanther preacher who hates america and white rich god fearing people.
..Obama's already lost these folks...
they voted GW Bush in last time..their vote counts more than all minorities put together..talk all you want about polls they mean nothing....
case closed...

At the end of the day, Hillary will sell her soul if she has to in order to win the nomination. She will then be another souless politician who expects us all to love. She's turned herself into a JOKE! How PATHETIC! I feel sorry for that woMAN!

It appear that this year the negative campaigning of the Clintons was drowned out by the positive message of Obama.

This year I want the opportunity to vote for a candidate for president rather than against the Republican or in 1992 when the arrogant Bill Clinton ran against the inept Bush Sr, I chose the third party, as a protest against the Democrats for supporting Clinton. Felt the same way in 68 and 84 and voted third party.

Obama is someone to vote for.

With Hillary, Fox, Rush and Ann Coulter all in the same corner, it's no wonder the Republicans are pushing for Clinton to stay in the race. The longer she stays the worse it is for Democrats. Thanks Hillary!

I am flabbergasted that Clinton has a single supporter left. This is a candidate who has virtually no mathematical chance of winning her party's nomination, and yet she continues to drag her party through the muck of her own narcissistic ambition. If McCain wins the White House this year, the blame rests squarely on Clinton, who seem to put her party and her country ahead of her own sense of entitlement to the presidency. Shameful.

I don't know if these polls really mean anything since most of the primaries are over with and the last remaining states are pretty much locked into their voting patterns. Hillary will never quit no matter how dirty or damage is done to the party and to Barack. As far as she is concerned it's her turn, again.

http://bp1.blogger.com/_Aj4UpljWkfo/R-pdQKO9GTI/AAAAAAAAACg/m26ybAadZOY/s1600-h/ihateobama_web.jpg

What are we telling our kids the lesson of quitting because people around you are telling you to quit. I think both Leahy and Dean should quit. They have no right to tell Hillary to quit. Obama also has no right to tell Hillary to stay. Who do you think you are ... ? Mr. Obama, for the sake of Dems Party, please quit. Will you quit? Just asking...

I am experiencing Clinton fatigue again. Please go away!!

I''m glad Mr. Obama is now focusing on Mr. McCain. There is nothing to be gained by continuing to trade barbs with Mrs. Clinton. She cannot win. It's time to focus on the Republicans.

People need to get off of the idea that Clinton should quit her campaign for the sake of the Democratic party.

America or the Democratic party should not stand for quitting at the first sign of difficulty or competition.
..worse yet, it's hypocritical of the Democratic party to say they are the party of the people, but reserve the right to change the rules of the game half way into it....thereby, circumventing "the people". If they didn't mean 2025 delegates to win, then they should have changed it ahead of time (say...2025 total delegates or whoever's ahead by 110 by end of March or ahead by 5% in popular votes).

Also, why would the Democratic party need super delegates, if all they're supposed to do is vote with the regular delegates.....

I'm not a Clinton supporter per se, but I just feel like self distructing Democrates with the media's help is trying to stir the pot and see what sticks to the spoon.

Democratic leadership shouldn't worry about the wounds from a long primary; they should worry about how it would appear to the entire nation if Clinton was forced out at this point of the race. Moderate Democrates and independents (I, for one) would lose a lot of respect for Obama and the party, if they felt like he was prematurely "crowned".

If Obama is the One, then let him show it through the ballot box.

Here's another crazy idea, why don't we have all the primary voting in the month of February, if Dem's don't want to drag it out.

It CAN'T be over yet - the PLAN has not been fulfilled:

Bush
Clinton
Bush
Clinton
Bush (Jeb) - why FL is so important!
Clinton (Chelsea)

Remember, it's her turn!

It CAN'T be over yet - the PLAN has not been fulfilled:

Bush
Clinton
Bush
Clinton
Bush (Jeb) - why FL is so important!
Clinton (Chelsea)

Remember, it's her turn!

It CAN'T be over yet - the PLAN has not been fulfilled:

Bush
Clinton
Bush
Clinton
Bush (Jeb) - why FL is so important!
Clinton (Chelsea)

Remember, it's her turn!

It CAN'T be over yet - the PLAN has not been fulfilled:

Bush
Clinton
Bush
Clinton
Bush (Jeb) - why FL is so important!
Clinton (Chelsea)

Remember, it's her turn!

Polls mean nothing now...we all know The Clinton's are liars and can't protect America, but we need to know alot more about Barack and his Rezko connections and his America hating, racist pastor that Barack hung around with for 20 YEARS!

McCain 08!

Paulo

It CAN'T be over yet - the PLAN has not been fulfilled:

Bush
Clinton
Bush
Clinton
Bush (Jeb) - why FL is so important!
Clinton (Chelsea)

Remember, it's her turn!

Keep her in. Make her pay all her bills.

Or is there a DNC $ bail out plan for the Clintons from the nameless 20?

if hillary wins the nomination, it will be by default, i.e., by deception, game-playing, fabrication, and support from fat-cat old-dem=machine politicians, who want to make sure they stay in their positions as well....

Someone please explain this to me...pundits say that the country wouldn't stand for Clinton being voted in by super-delegates despite the outcome of popular vote...isn't this the same country where Al Gore got the most votes yet didn't become president?

YOU MIGHT BE AN IDIOT:-)

If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an economy on the verge of collapse better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and prosperity in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience fighting for universal health care can get it for you better than Hillary Clinton. Who anticipated this current health care crisis back in 1993, and fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds to get universal health care for all the American people.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience can manage, and get us out of two wars better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) went to war only when he was convinced that he absolutely had to. Then completed the mission in record time against a nuclear power. AND DID NOT LOSE THE LIFE OF A SINGLE AMERICAN SOLDIER. NOT ONE!

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience saving the environment is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) left office with the greatest amount of environmental cleanup, and protections in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with little or no education experience is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) made higher education affordable for every American. And created higher job demand and starting salary's than they had ever been before or since.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience will be better than Hillary Clinton who spent 8 years at the right hand of President Bill Clinton. Who is already on record as one of the greatest Presidents in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that you can change the way Washington works with pretty speeches from Obama, rather than with the experience, and political expertise of two master politicians ON YOUR SIDE like Hillary and Bill Clinton..

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think all those Republicans voting for Obama in the Democratic primaries, and caucuses are doing so because they think he is a stronger Democratic candidate than Hillary Clinton. :-)

Best regards

jacksmith...

DON'T BE DUPED !!!

Large numbers of Republicans have been voting for Barack Obama in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, and caucuses from early on. Because they feel he would be a weaker opponent against John McCain. And because they feel that a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket would be unbeatable. And also because with a Clinton and Obama ticket you are almost 100% certain to get quality, affordable universal health care very soon.

But first, all of you have to make certain that Hillary Clinton takes the democratic nomination and then the Whitehouse. NOW! is the time. THIS! is the moment you have all been working, and waiting for. You can do this America. “Carpe diem” (harvest the day).

I think Hillary Clinton see’s a beautiful world of plenty for all. She is a woman, and a mother. And it’s time America. Do this for your-self, and your children’s future. You will have to work together on this and be aggressive, relentless, and creative. Americans face an even worse catastrophe ahead than the one you are living through now.

Hillary Clinton has actually won by much larger margins than the vote totals showed. And lost by much smaller vote margins than the vote totals showed. Her delegate count is actually much higher than it shows. And higher than Obama’s. She also leads in the electoral college numbers that you must win to become President in the November national election. HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!

As much as 30% of Obama's primary, and caucus votes are Republicans trying to choose the weakest democratic candidate for McCain to run against. These Republicans have been gaming the caucuses where it is easier to vote cheat. This is why Obama has not been able to win the BIG! states primaries. Even with Republican vote cheating help.

Hillary Clinton has been out manned, out gunned, and out spent 2 and 3 to 1. Yet Obama has only been able to manage a very tenuous, and questionable tie with Hillary Clinton.

If Obama is the democratic nominee for the national election in November he will be slaughtered. Because the Republican vote cheating help will suddenly evaporate. All of this vote fraud and republican manipulation has made Obama falsely look like a much stronger candidate than he really is. YOUNG PEOPLE. DON’T BE DUPED! Think about it. You have the most to lose.

The democratic party needs to fix this outrage. I suggest a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket. Everyone needs to throw all your support to Hillary Clinton NOW! So you can end this outrage against YOU the voter, and against democracy.

I think Barack Obama has a once in a life time chance to make the ultimate historic gesture for unity, and change in America by accepting Hillary Clinton’s offer as running mate. Such an act now would for ever seal Barack Obama’s place at the top of the list of Americas all time great leaders, and unifiers for all of history.

The democratic party, and the super-delegates have a decision to make. Are the democrats, and the democratic party going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee to fight for the American people. Or are the republicans going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee through vote fraud, and gaming the DEMOCRATIC party primaries, and caucuses.

Fortunately the Clinton’s have been able to hold on against this fraudulent outrage with those repeated dramatic comebacks of Hillary Clinton’s. Only the Clinton’s are that resourceful, and strong. Hillary Clinton is your NOMINEE. They are the best I have ever seen.

Sincerely

jacksmith...

It cracks me up when Connies press the Obama pastor thing. Can anyone show me anything Obama has said or written that aligns him with any of the various sermons Wright has made? Read his last book and you will understand the dude much better than the kooky snippets from Wright.

What are we telling our kids the lesson of quitting because people around you are telling you to quit. I think both Leahy and Dean should quit. They have no right to tell Hillary to quit. Obama also has no right to tell Hillary to stay. Who do you think you are ... ? Mr. Obama, for the sake of Dems Party, please quit. Will you quit? Just asking...
Posted by: Agnes | March 30, 2008 7:47 PM

I think it's good to teach kids that it's not just all about you, but the greater good. It's also about honor...Hillary sticking it out when there is little chance of getting the nomination just drains resources from the real battle at hand. I do think if they were reversed, that Obama WOULD have dropped his bid by now. And it isn't correct to call it quitting. Any poker player would tell Hillary that it's time to fold before busting the bank.

Clinton almost didn't leave the White House after Bush Jr. was sworn in because the Clintons don't know when to disappear for the good of the country. So, of course, Clinton isn't going to bow out of the race because she doesn't do what's right and it's kinda like e-couli on a plastic cutting board - it just keeps growing into an uglier glob and we all know it.

Subtitle: "Ding, dong, the witch is dead..." LOL

You guys are missing the big picture. Hillary knows that she is not going to win this nomination, but if Obama goes on to become president she has not shot till 2016. Her whole mission is to bloody him up and destroy him so that he looses the election, is hopefully a spent force within the party and then she can walk in to the nomination in 2012 with nothing in her way.

"I think Hillary Clinton see’s a beautiful world of plenty for all. She is a woman, and a mother."

jacksmith,

Hey, I think I can speak for everyone here at the Swamp that we would all like a bit of whatever you're smoking.

A little goofy, but sounds like a nice place with fairies, unicorns and gingerbread houses.

I hope the national numbers also begin to impact places like PA, NC and Indiana. Obama's use of technology in this race towers over his competitors and gives me hope that he'll leverage it in the service of good governance. While I respect McCain, his time came and went in 2000. It's now time to turn the reins of government over to the next generation of leadership. Remember, if experience were the ultimate criteria we'd elect GW Bush to a third term.

Fortunately the Clinton’s have been able to hold on against this fraudulent outrage with those repeated dramatic comebacks of Hillary Clinton’s. Only the Clinton’s are that resourceful, and strong. Hillary Clinton is your NOMINEE. They are the best I have ever seen.
Sincerely
jacksmith...

Posted by: jacksmith | March 30, 2008 10:06 PM

Unfortunately your Republican cut and past cheerleading for Hillary does get thru!!

You're not fooling anyone Rush....

You might be an idiot!

If you think she has 35 years of experience...

If you think she's going to release her tax returns...

If you think he's going to release the list of presidential library donors...

If you think they are in this for anything but the money....

If you think they care about the working class...

If you think the republicans are voting for him in the primaries...

If you think Hillary has 35 years of worthwhile experience...You may be an Idiot

I want someone to ask Hillary Clinton this: Where were you when the DNC first declared that FL and MI delegates wouldn't be seated? If you're so damned concerned about the voters of those states, where were you? Oh, that's right -- I forgot! You were signing the pledge that you agreed with the action and wouldn't campaign in those states! You AGREED WITH THE DNC'S ACTION. But now, now that you're behind in the delegate count and somehow have it in your math-deprived head that seating those delegates will help you, suddenly you're all concerned about the voters of MI and FL. I repeat: if you're so concerned, where were you in the beginning??

I am flabbergasted that Clinton has a single supporter left. This is a candidate who has virtually no mathematical chance of winning her party's nomination, and yet she continues to drag her party through the muck of her own narcissistic ambition. If McCain wins the White House this year, the blame rests squarely on Clinton, who seem to put her party and her country ahead of her own sense of entitlement to the presidency. Shameful.

Posted by: Seth |
-----------------
Seth, I am sorry but when you say "If McCain wins the White House this year, the blame rests squarely on Clinton, who seem to put her party and her country ahead of her own sense of entitlement to the presidency. Shameful."

I believe you meant to say"
"If McCain wins the White House this year, the blame rests squarely on Clinton, WHO SEEMS TO PUT HER OWN SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT TO THE PRESIDENCY AHEAD OF HER PARTY AND HER COUNTRY. Shameful."
---------------
I am in full agreement with you!.

If Clinton want's people to start taking her seriously again she needs to start going after McCain on a fulltime basis, that's what I want to see from her.

She also needs to pay off her campaign debts, release all of her tax returns (2003-2007) and release the donar list to the Clinton libray.

If she want's to regain some of the credibilty and integrity she lost after the Bosnia lie this would be a good place to start, until she does this I will withhold any support I may have for her candidacy.

What are we telling our kids the lesson of quitting because people around you are telling you to quit. I think both Leahy and Dean should quit. They have no right to tell Hillary to quit. Obama also has no right to tell Hillary to stay. Who do you think you are ... ? Mr. Obama, for the sake of Dems Party, please quit. Will you quit? Just asking...

Posted by: Agnes
-----------------
Agnes, your posting is quite intestesting and contradictory. First you say, "I think both Leahy and Dean should quit."
In the same breath you say, "They have no right to tell Hillary to quit."
Then you chide Senator Obama with: "Obama also has no right to tell Hillary to stay. Who do you think you are ... ?"
Then you say to Senator Obama, "Mr. Obama, for the sake of Dems Party, please quit. Will you quit? Just asking"

Oh, so NOBODY CAN ASK HILLARY TO QUIT; if they do, then you TELL THEM TO QUIT. Agnes, does that even make sense to you?

Then, you chastize Senator Obama for saying Hillary should stay in the race. Gee, no matter what, you find fault!!

The ultimate hypocracy on your part is saying, "Mr. Obama, for the sake of Dems Party, please quit. Will you quit? Just asking"
Whew, what a hypocrite! Others do not have the right to ask Hillary to quit; but, YOU have the right to ask Senator Obama to quit?? Wow!! This is the epitomy of hypocracy!!

Why should Senator Obama quit? He IS AHEAD on all counts: more delegates, more popular votes, more states won.

Your thinking and reasoning(??) are really flabbergasting!!

Actually, what hasn’t been covered much are her cascading excuses or “misstatements” about this Bosnia tale, culminating in her saying this to KDKA radio in Pittsburgh on 3/25/08:
“I have written about this and described in many different settings and I did misspeak the other day,” Clinton said during a live 10-minute interview. “This has been a very long campaign….Last week for the first time in 12 years or so, I misspoke.”

Bizarro. No wonder Obama's lead has grown. It's a wonder it's not even bigger.

Posted by: None-So-Blind | March 30, 2008 6:51 PM
----------------------
What? Hillary said this is the first time she has misspoken (LIED) in 12 years or so?? ABSOLUTELY UNBELEIVABLE!!!

Has Hillary gone completely insane? This is LYING BEYOND THE PALE, on the same level as her ducking their heads and running to their cars to avoid sniper fire. Wow, this gal needs major help!!

Gosh - It is over. See this news report from The Onion.
Diebold Accidentally Leaks Results Of 2008 Election Early

http://www.theonion.com/content//node/74800?utm_source=embedded_video_2

Actually, what hasn’t been covered much are her cascading excuses or “misstatements” about this Bosnia tale, culminating in her saying this to KDKA radio in Pittsburgh on 3/25/08:
“I have written about this and described in many different settings and I did misspeak the other day,” Clinton said during a live 10-minute interview. “This has been a very long campaign….Last week for the first time in 12 years or so, I misspoke.”

Bizarro. No wonder Obama's lead has grown. It's a wonder it's not even bigger.

Posted by: None-So-Blind | March 30, 2008 6:51 PM
----------------------
What? Hillary said this is the first time she has misspoken (LIED) in 12 years or so?? ABSOLUTELY UNBELEIVABLE!!!

Has Hillary gone completely insane? This is LYING BEYOND THE PALE, on the same level as her ducking their heads and running to their cars to avoid sniper fire. Wow, this gal needs major help!!

@ jacksmith

Um, you have that backwards, there.

Republicans who vote for Obama admit that he more closely resembles what their party SHOULD stand for than any candidate they've had in the past couple of generations

Republicans who vote for Hillary say they do so because they know she is unelectable. Go back and look at the pre-voting polls, the Texas polls, and a few others since and then you'll understand.

Oh, and by the way, do you know WHY Obama has so much more money that Hillary's campaign? It's because we, the "peons" support him so fully we give enough 5, 10, 25, and up donations to fund such a campaign. Hillary's the one with all the rich "super-delegate" funding that seems bottomless, yet hasn;t been enough. That's because, even though she caters to the big business and elitists like you, she's just not appealing to the average American, for reasons you would know if you were as informed about her political actions as you are lauding of them.

You might be delusional:)
If you're jacksmith

By the way Clinton just lost Texas. Didn't Bill say that she should bow out if she loses Texas?

For someone running on her "experience" at working the complicated political system to produce results she sure is terrible at navigating the caucus system. She's been completely out-organized in these contests.

Everytime Billary tries to sling the mud at Obama it lands right back in their collective faces. She is a LIAR. OK, so we don't expect our presidential candidates to be angels. But to be such a dumb, stupid LIAR -- she doesn't deserve the presidency. Didn't she know that there were other people on the trip besides herself? And if she's not a LIAR then she's DELUSIONAL or SLEEP DEPRIVED. Is that who you want answering the phone at 3AM in the morning?

Hillary is down in the polls, worse than ever before. Now, more than 50% of the people give Hillary a negative poll rating.

Why?? Because people have seen enough to know she's a liar, cheater, mud-slinger, and NOT the "experienced" candidate she says she is.

Heck, she doesn't even pay her vendors!!!

If anyone reading this still supports Hillary, PLEASE try to step back from the situation and see this woman for what she is.
She is not fit to be in government, in any capacity whatsoever.

Folks,

I'm a Democrat, but you know this whole primary thing is really getting old. The older it gets the more I like McCain. He isn't really a social conservative by any means. Besides, he is a veteran like me. I don't have a doubt that Mrs. Clinton would be a great President. However, it is time for her to put her ambition to rest. I'm so annoyed right now that I'm really ready to go into that poll in November and vote all Democrats in Kansas out. Gee, it can't be worst than it already is. Unless your Bernie Everret or Angelo Mozzillo, millions in the bank and a comfty bunk in jail.

Jacksmith, You sure fling alot of remarkable statements out as facts without providing any backup. Obviously you weren't duped by any Gallup poll into thinking that that 30% of Obama's votes came from Republican crossovers. --So where did that figure come from? No one was doing that kind of exit polling, that I saw. Not only do I find it incredulous; but I thought that since so many Republicans have such a dark view of Hillary, she'd be the one they'd think would be easier to defeat. And I imagine that's why some people like Ann Coulter are promoting Hillary....not Obama.

Hillary is down in the polls, worse than ever before. Now, more than 50% of the people give Hillary a negative poll rating.

Why?? Because people have seen enough to know she's a liar, cheater, mud-slinger, and NOT the "experienced" candidate she says she is.

Heck, she doesn't even pay her vendors!!!

If anyone reading this still supports Hillary, PLEASE try to step back from the situation and see this woman for what she is.
She is not fit to be in government, in any capacity whatsoever.

This will all be over in a matter of weeks if not days. Hillary's shoes and pantsuits are about to be repossessed, I swear.

Clinton's planes will be grounded for lack of gas money, her phones will be cut off, electricity will get cut off and her credit cards will quit working any day now. She won't find any more vendors willing to give the bum anymore credit. The MSM will start talking about her long list of creditors and it will start to be curtains.

She is so in debt right now that the campaign has resorted to astroturfing her FUNDRAISERS! Check out the WSJ for Peggy Noonan's column. Noonan had bought a cheap seat, but then they moved a bunch of folks from the cheap seats into the "high dollar" area lest it look completely barren and empty.

Also - Slate has a deathwatch meter up.

TPM election central has the links....

The Clinton campaign has about $2 million in chargebacks that they need to issue for "accidentally" doublecharging donors on their credit cards

You Might Be Crazy!

If you believe that Bill Clinton is getting a 3rd term

You Might Be Crazy!

If you believe that a vote for Hillary is a vote for Bill.

You Might Be Crazy!

If you believe that someone who lies about ducking sniper fire in spite of the huge number of witnesses to the contrary, needs to answer the phone at 3AM in the morning.

You Might Be Crazy!

If you believe that someone who lies on national TV stating that her daughter was jogging near the World Trade towers when the 1st plane hit deserves to be president.

You Might be Crazy!

If you believe that the FAILURE to institute a national health policy is a good reason to give Hillary another shot at failure.

You Might be Crazy!

If you believe that to be next to power and intellect is the same as being powerful and intellectual. (Secretaries of the world unite - you are our best hope for president.)

You Might Be Crazy!

If you don't remember that the Republican machine brought this country to a standstill during the Clinton impreachment process. And crazier still if you don't know that Hillary is suddenly being talked about in glowing terms by the same Richard Mellon Scaife who once spent millions smearing the Clintons with Troopergate, and implications in the "murders" of Ron Brown and Vince Foster. And crazier yet if you don't know that Rush Limbaugh encouraged Republicans to vote for Hillary because they know that Obama is the true threat to the McCain presidency.

You Might Be Crazy!

If you don't see that the Bush and Clintons have now joined forces to enrich themselves and this is why we can't find out who funded the Clinton library and why Hillary is having such a hard time releasing her taxes.

You Might Be Crazy!

If you don't know that Obama has won more primaries and caucauses than Hillary. PERIOD.

You Might Be Crazy!

If you will tell yourself anything, lie to yourself, bury your head in the sand, that in spite of all truth, facts, figures, you will go forth boldly and lie to anyone who will listen, convince yourself, delude yourself that you know for a fact that 30% or any percent of Republicans are voting for Obama because of a fear of Hillary, or to pretend not to know that Obama has won more PRIMARIES, CAUCAUSES, and the POPULAR vote, to delude yourself and pretend not to know that the electoral college has absolutely nothing to do with primaries, that you refuse to at least be honest, that you will say or do anything, tell any lie, do whatever it takes - you must be Crazy - no, wait, not crazy - you must be just like Hillary.

Posted by: jacksmith | March 30, 2008 10:06 PM

Jacksmith not only are you clueless but without your "you might be an idiot" rants fairly boring.

Yet another Hillary zombie!

YOU MIGHT BE AN IDIOT:-)
If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.

Response - YOU MIGHT BE AN IDIOT:
If you think Hillary Clinton truly has 35 year of experience. She was elected until 2000. Going back 35 years you’ll find during that time she was a Yale law student, she was working for the Rose Law Firm & canvassing for George McGovern, on the board at Wal-Mart, who was selling products as “American Made” back then, when in truth they were not.. 8 years as First Lady (or wife of a governor) – does that qualify Laura Bush to be President?

You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an economy on the verge of collapse better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and prosperity in American history.

Response - YOU MIGHT BE AN IDIOT:
If you think either or them has any economic experience. Both will have ECONOMIC ADVISORS who hopefully won’t be students of Friedman. Hopefully, Bill will stay completely out of it, because the dot.com bubble was not of his doing (after all Bill didn’t create the Internet – Al did (just kidding)), but NAFTA was, the repeal of the Glass-Steagal Act (which regulated the banking industry) in 1999 with his passage of the Gramm – Leach – Biley Act gave us the current sub-prime crisis. And let’s not forget the deregulation (oversight) of utilities which gave people $900 utility bills, not to mention those who lost the pensions and jobs when ENRON folded and MCI. All of which were Republican bills with which Bill agreed because he and Hillary are both leaders of the DLC (the right – Republican – wing of the Democratic Party which is pro-business, not pro-blue collar workers. Hillary’s plan f