Obama: Clinton lacks standing to offer me VP spot

Did someone just send the Clinton camp a memo on who becomes President if something happens to the current Chief Exec.? It seems as though they just now realized how asinine it sounds to try to sway voters with Obama as VP while saying he shouldn't be President.

Can't they all just shut up until November?

That's what I'd really like.

Hillary, YOU ARE LOSING...badly!

...and you're so far behind in the delegate count that you basically have no chance of winning...

This womans desperation for power is almost as bad as BushCo's.

If Obama was as far behind as Hillary is now she would be screaming at the top of her lungs for him to drop out.

Hillary is a racist and wants Obama to Drive Miss Hillary. The mere idea of her considering him for the No.2 spot when she is in second place is hysterical. I guess she told dat Mr. Obama to get to the back of the bus.

Gotta agree with 'Bama on this one. Hills does not have the standing.

Also agree with Cheryl Hussein.

To all candies; SHUT UP!!!

In other news, the Cubs have asked the Yankees if they'd like to meet in the World Series.

Obama and Wesley Clark in November!

Obama is right. This is Washington double speak that defies logic. The loser asking the winner to get behind her. I guess she thinks enough of us are stupid enough to sway the election in her favor. THis is why uneducated voters favor Clinton. Weak, malluble minds.

Breaking News!!! Major Political Scandal!!!

Large numbers of Republicans have been voting for Barack Obama in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, and caucuses. 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.

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. 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.

If Obama is the democratic nominee for the national election in November he will be slaughtered. Because the 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.

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

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.

You should be angry America. "This is not a game" (Hillary Clinton)

Sincerely

jacksmith...

I agree with both of them- neither is qualified for anything...

One has to question how sincere Hillary is, in "offering" the VP slot to Obama, considering the fact that she continues to distort and lies about Obama's records and positions (not to mention being way behind on delegates). I, for one, would not buy this silly notion about a "dream" ticket.

"Obama and Wesley Clark in November!

Posted by: Angoose | March 10, 2008 2:24 PM "

Wesley Clark supports Hillary because he is not an idiot and doesn't want the country run by another President with no experience. Or who has a wife that hates America.

NOBAMA '08
If he is the nominee I will vote for nader or nobody. His supporters have turned me off to him.

Obama your are certainly a cocky one, she thinks you should be VP cause that is all you are qualified for, but in my opinion you are not even qualified for that. And besides your crooked background in Chgo style politics will only embarass the US when it comes to you being President. This contest is far from over, so put your tail between your legs and get ready to slink off. To the owner of the blog, I dear you to print this.

Obama The Uniter?

If he refuses to join with Hillary, in the rather unlikely event he wins the nomination, the my vote for McSame will count even more!

jacksmith... where's the proof? this sounds more like a "Clinton Tactic" to me...

Rush Limbaugh wants YOU to vote for Hillary Clinton! I wonder why?

Hey, Jacksmith, you don't know jack. I was trying to figureo out if you were being sarcastic, but I decided you are just dumb.

For Republicans to do this, you'd have to assume that there is some kind of conspiracy going on. And that they are smart enough to pull it off.

This is the exact reason why I could never vote for a Clinton. They feel as if they are above everything including the will of the people.
Why people still give this couple merit is beyond me .
Thank You Sen Obama - for addressing the issue with tact and class and not going into the gutter as the Clintons seem to dwell in . My Gosh the avg. attention span of an US citizen must be that of a gnat . He was impeached people ! Not to mention the Peter Paul trial coming out .Talk about buyers remorse. Those who voted for this woman will be thinking " I cant believe they did it to me , again ! " DUH - thats their legacy !

With all due respect, Mr. Obama you made have won more states, but not the big states needed to win an general election. Believe me if you become the nominee, you will not win the Presidency. You have to much negative baggage at your front door and GOP will use everything they have against you. Especially your lack of experience and substance.

Thank you Jacksmith for FINALLY changing your postings from "You might be an idiot".

Now please don't duplicate THIS one 64 times in EVERY forum and I can finally start reading them, even if I don't agree with them.

Jacksmith, you have that turned around. It was Hillary the Republican's are voting for. this was suggested by Rush Limbaugh and apparently it worked in Ohio and Texas.

Re: The post by jacksmith-

Do you have any kind of credible evidence of this? I think you're just a Hillary-supporter who is dreaming up some news. The before-voting polls along with the exit polls shows this not to be the case. I have heard of a small number of Republicans voting for Clinton because they would love to have her as the Democratic candidate. In virtually all polls done, Obama does far better against McCain than Clinton does. He also has shown that he will draw Independents better than McCain. So, I ask- please provide evidence of your thesis or it will just be one more thing that shows how desperate the Clinton campaign is. Thank you.

the country run by another President with no experience. Or who has a wife that hates America.

NOBAMA '08
If he is the nominee I will vote for nader or nobody. His supporters have turned me off to him.

Posted by: Cleocat | March 10, 2008 2:40 PM

agree with both of them- neither is qualified for anything...

Posted by: heartburn | March 10, 2008 2:33 PM
-----------------------

These comments crack me up, these "two" guys are Republicans and "they've" been posting as such for over a year now.

This tells me one thing, when Repubs like these two buffoons are on here cheerleading for Hillary it means they're scared to death of facing Obama in the general election this fall.

I LOVE IT!

OBAMA 08!!!

Obama it is the Commander-in-Chief not the Commander and Chief, you don't even know what you are going for here. Actually she was not serious, she was handing you a crumb.

Sen. Clinton's ad said she was most qualified to answer that 3AM call, not that Sen. Obama was unqualified.
The ad did not have Sen. Obama tripping across the oval office and dropping the phone, it merely had Sen. Clinton answering it.

It is rather presumptuous for someone running number two in the race to even suggest that the number one candidate should not supersede her.

To rationally-minded people it smacks of desperation and hypocrisy.

Rev. William Hayashi

Are we sure we are ready to elect a woman president? If so is Hillary Clinton the right woman to take that place? I do not think so. I do not believe that she is for our country but more for the game of this race. This is not a game. Look at her past dishonesty in the public eye.

Obama is right that he's ahead in primaries, but the big states still belong to Clinton and if Florida and Michigan count toward the "popular" vote all she'll need is a medium-sized win in Pa. to pull ahead.

Richard Nixon would be a good running mate for Hillary: just as secretive, just as manipulative. Or it could be Kim Jong il, who is just as egotistical and arrogant. Just call up any member of the mudslinger's society and they would qualify for a VP spot under Clinton. But Hillary is BEHIND in the delegate count. She's using the Image of Leadership against the backdrop of her own Slander and Deceit. Nixon can't come back from the dead, and Kim Jong il won't switch parties (or leave his country). And Obama will not jeopardize his Ideology to play swab hand on a sinking ship.

jacksmith, you're obviously trying to be subversive, since everything you've just stated is a lie. First off, Republicans have been voting for Clinton, just like Limbaugh told them to. Second, Obama is way ahead in delegates. If only people like you would take a break from ruining America every once in awhile, things just might be better for the rest of us.

Anyway--the media is just now catching onto this? Clinton has been saying this stuff for almost a week, and it just occured to us that, hey, Obama is in the lead? Terrible.

Exactly, David...why does Rush want you to vote for Hillary? Let's see 47% of Americans have said they would NOT vote for Hillary, gee that seems like McCrazy won't have a very tough time rallying4% of the remaining voters to back his candidacy. Remeber all it is not about you or the party...rather it is about Hill and Bill, always has been always will be!

If your favorite doesn't get the nomination and you don't vote for the other, you're not voting based on the issues. For as much as they are trying to play up differences right now, their platforms are largely the same.

ATTENTION DEMOCRATS:

Drug addict Rush Limbaugh want's you to vote for Hillary Clinton.

I think that says it all about who the Wingnuts DON'T want to run against this fall...OBAMA!

I'll be voting for Senator Obama in the upcoming Pa primary.

The only reason Hillary is
hinting at a Clinton/Obama
ticket is for primary votes.
She knows he is the better
candidate but she has a sense
of entitlement.
I voted for Bill, I thought he
was a really good president
but both Clintons are getting
on my last nerve now.

jacksmith, your accusations sort of fall down when compared to the facts.

On average, about 9% of the Democratic primary has been by Republicans in those states with an open primary. About the same percentage of Republicans have voted for the last few Democratic presidential candidates in the general election, so that's right on target for being normal.

Add in the facts about Republicans attending his rallies, volunteering in his campaign, and otherwise supporting him far beyond a "spoiler" vote, and it starts looking like Reagan Democrats in reverse.

If you want to examine who's more electable in November with polling data, statistics, and electoral vote analysis instead of making up your own "facts," check this out:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/6/212016/8597/980/470910

Hillary is right in claiming that Obama is 'not ready to be President' but 'good enough to be trained by her to become President as her VP.'

Are we contemplating the President-elect to vanish into thin air on the day of taking office? No! We hope the President-elect would serve her 4-year term with Obama as VP so that at the end of 4 years Obama would indeed be capable.

Obama has offered to meet any head of state without any precondition. That fits the role of the VP very well. As VP he could meet any head of state and come back to USA. As he would not be President, in case he has committed any mistake in his promises outside USA, Hillary as President has a chance to steer America to happiness.

Obama has to gain more delegates in primaries to claim front runner status. Remember the November election is not a caucus.

Cacuses are a shame on democracy as the vote is not confidential and thus is subject to undue influence of the powerful on the weak and the meek.

I am amazed by some of these comments. Touting what is clearly unsubstantiated propaganda as truth is the worst thing about politics. As voters we have a responsibility to know as much actual truth as possible and trying to foist ideas on one another, like Republicans are voting for Obama because he isn't electable, is unsupportable. He is beating Clinton in votes by registered Democrats, that is just true. Also, I would bet a year's salary that just as many Republicans say they voted for Clinton to weaken the Dem's chances as voted for Obama for that reason. And the number of Republican voters who would really bother doing that with either candidate is minimal to say the least. Just because you wish something were true doesn't make it so.

Jacksmith, you may be right, but if you assume that in the case Obama is nominee all the Hillary-voters will defect to McCain. In which case, this would mean that the 45% of democrats are the one who will be playing the game and not the 30% republicans (or Obamacans).
Thanks,
TA

Has any one really lnoticed the obama has only won in the small republican states yes he might have a lot of electoral votes but come November he will not win any of the republican states and we will have gw bush jr. in the white house. Frank Bowers of Austin, TX

The Clintons are very cunning. This is a two way strategy.

Clinton dropping Obama's name is a 2way strategy.

1. In the immediate future it is an attempt to hoodwink undecided voters.

2. But in the later future, it is an attempt to negotiate an obligation for herself should Obama win to pick her for VP on the belief that she would have picked Obama.

The Clintons I think should be more honest than that, they should come clean, quit the race, endorse Obama and then apply for VP.

If they DUID run with either ticket and did win, how comfortable do you think the president would be knowing that the vp was breathing over his/her shoulder?

Hillary "offering" the vp spot to Obama would be like me offering to help get Tiger Woods into the pro-am.

REMEMBER THE OLD SAYING CAN ANYTHING GOOD COME OUT OF DENMARK WITHOUT SMELLING. I GREW UP IN CHICAGO, ILL. AND KNOW THAT ANY POLITICIAN REP OR DEM WHO COMES OUT OF CHICAGO POLITICS CANNOT COME OUT WITHOUT SMELLING, AND NOT LIKE A ROSE EITHER.

As a McCain supporter I do not think it makes a difference who he faces. I think Obama will be easier to beat because of his corrupt background and lack of any real tangible accomplishments in government. However if you factor in the popular vote from Mich and FL then Obama and CLinton are in a virtual tie with the popular vote. I think Obama would only lead with around 15,000 votes. That will easily be made up in PA. I agree that MIch and Fl delegates should not count but how on earth can you not count them towards the popular vote? Please explain this to me. People voted it should count. The party that ahs cried for years about voters votes not being counted is going to just not let millions vote.

First!!!

jacksmith, you have it backwards... Large numbers of Republicans have been voting for HILLARY in the DEMOCRATIC primaries. They believe that she in fact will be easier to pick apart then Barack...

Cleocat, if Barack's supporters have turned you off, WHAT DID THEY DO?

Hey, jacksmith...paranoid much? My Republican brother in Ohio voted in the primary for Obama, but because he thinks Obama is the best candidate, not because he joined in on some conspiracy. However, if it's a McCain/Clinton matchup this fall, there's no way he'll vote for her. I don't doubt there are some people voting outside their party to game the system, but at this point Obama is in the lead--keeping Hillary in the race is a smarter strategy--does that make her a fraud? There are thoughtful, independent-minded voters in ALL parties, just as each party has its share of morons. Lighten up!

Jimmy Hussein Venom, ummm Hillary maybe losing in the delegate count, but last time i checked she is still beating him in SUPER DELEGATES!!!! AND AT THE RATE THAT THEY ARE BOTH GOING NEITHER WILL GET THE NECESSARY AMOUNT FOR THE NOMINATION...SO SUPER DELEGATES ARE "MORE" IMPORTANT!!! GO HILLARY "EXPERIENCE DOES COUNT" AND OBAMA HAS YET TO WIN A MAJOR MAJOR STATE!!!!

I'm confused. Do they want him to be vice-president, or don't they? Do they think he's qualified to do it, or don't they? Do they realize that this constant push-me pull-me routine is getting more than a little weird and tiresome to voters out here?

Mr. Jacksmith... You're wrong about Republicans voting in the Democratic primaries because we (I am a Republican)think Obama would be a weaker opponent against McCain. It has nothing to do with McCain. We (friends, family and apparently Republican Wyoming too) voted for Obama hoping to get shed of Clinton. As for who would be best to answer that phone at 3 AM... I sure don't want a president dripping tears into the receiver... which I guess is OK with you?

You Obama followers are funny - Just as sad as the vapid, empty candidate you support. Obama has NOT WON A SINGLE LARGE state. If he can't pull a large state NOW - how do you think he will against a solida candidate like McCain. He needs to be happy that anyone wants him for anything - being that he has done nothing up to and until now!

Before yelling I have more delegates than you, let the primaries in every state complete.

Why does Obama camp want HRC to surrender?

Why does HRC want BHO to be the VP candidate?

Let the people decide.

The show is funny and interesting, all African-American voting for Obama as a block without having much information about him.

I am voting for McCain. I can't wait to see McCain strolling leisurely into the White House.

Bring on the Hope and Change crap to the General Election and see what happens.

RFB, thanks for show your initals... really brave!

As far as your comment on Obama being part of "Chgo style politics", I do not believe that you understand what that means...

Qualifications for Hillary and Barack are at least similar, so that arguement is not applicable.

The experience level between Hillary and Laura Bush - there IS a difference there!
But still not by much...

It's insanely manipulative to float these ideas and create the FALSE impression that voting for Hillary might effectively be seen as a vote to put both of them in office. Confuse a few percent of the voters with this idea, confuse another percent or two with the 'Obama is a muslim' meme, confuse a a few percent more with 'Obama is unprepared' suddenly close races turn towards HRC. It's just despicable. Why doesn;t she just come out and say "Obama would make a good president over my dead body."

I'm confused by what "jacksmith" said.

I usually vote Republican, but I am voting for Obama in this race because we've spent the last 20 years with a Bush or a Clinton in the White House and I truly believe that it is time for someone else to "have a turn."

I think Hillary is an awful, mean-spirited, power-hungry person. I don't even care that she's a woman--she's just an awful person, plain and simple.

Being the wife of the president hardly counts as being "more qualified" to be President.

Anyway--back to what "jacksmith" said.

I'm under the impression that Obama can beat McCain, and that Hillary can't. When Governor Edgar was asked who he wanted to win the Democratic nomination he answered "Clinton" without hesitation, and when asked why, he said that she's beatable and Obama might not be. I agree with him.

And yes, it is ridiculous that "the Monster" suggested that Obama would be a good running mate when she's in last place right now.

Do Do You You think think this this is is nothing nothing but but Clinton Clinton doubletalk doubletalk ??

You know it's funny...Texas has a primary and caucus as it's democratic candidate system. How come everyone states that Hillary has won Texas when it's clear that Obama wins the higher number of delegates?

Obama 98
Clinton 95

based on the current available data.

Hill is not losing BADLY. I wouldn't have Obama as a VP though. I am sure she said it tongue in cheek. He doesn't have to take comments so literally. I guess he will learn that...the hard way!

Go Hill!

Obama I believe he can answer the white house phone at 3am in office and do a real good job.I for one don't want clintons back in office. We need new blood in there. Not old ones.

Jacksmith - this is satire, right? It has to be.

If you are serious (which, again, to reiterate, you cannot be), please check facts (if any) and vocal suspicions (plenty), then redraft your post. Better yet, if you are serious (which it must be stated one more time, you cannot be), ask yourself - who would you rather face in November?

jacksmith...

I am one of those Republicans who voted for Obama...you just have the reasoning wrong. I voted for Obama because what's most important is Hilary not ending up in office. That is the worst case scenario for our country. Quite honestly, McCain or Obama will probably do an equally crappy job, but Hilary would be atrocious.

Obama needs to realize that the genenal election won't be a cake walk. The Clintons are doing you a favor - remember what John McCain said about you!

If you can't beat up Hillary you are no good. I will stick to Hillary!

Jacksmith, you're wrong. The Republicans are advocating Clinton as the easiest to beat.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/rush-limbaugh-hillary-clinton

This race is still too close to call. Neither one will have enough delegates by convention without invoking the superdelegates. In either case, that would split the party and make the party look weak and definitely lose to Repubs. One way or another, these two candidates will need to unite... before the convention.

@jacksmith

You've got it backwards. Who has Rush Limbaugh been telling Republicans to go out and vote for? Obama? No... Clinton. And who was responsible for there being as much of a swing in the March 4th elections? Republicans voting for Clinton.

Find another place to get your facts, because everywhere I've seen analysis of the situation has clearly pointed to both of these statements as being truth...

This nomination will have to be chosen at a brokered convention unless a re-vote in Florida and Michigan and a win in Pennsylvania all favor Senator Clinton. As it stands now, neither Clinton nor Obama will have the sufficient number of delegates to win with pledged delegates. If the Democratic primary process were run like the Republican one--that is "winner takes all"--the Democratic nominee would have been chosen already. The winner would have been Senator Clinton. Interestingly, it is a measly 3,000 popular votes separating Clinton and Obama which is much less than 1 percent of the total popular vote. Saying this election is close is an understatement. No matter who ultimately wins the nomination, I hope there is a push for some standardization/reform of the primary voting process among states.

FORMER republicans who voted for Obama - and I am one - do so because they believe in his message and in his policy stances. Many of us are capable of making our own decisions. Folks who voted for Hillary because "RUSH LIMBAUGH" told them to are not the same.

Some Republicans want to see the best candidates on both sides.

I can not vote for Mrs. Clinton if she is the nominee. She is too divisive, too ridiculous and too polarizing a figure. As an independent, I would vote for McCain if OBAMA's nomination is stolen from him.

Obama supporters are generally highly educated folks who don't get swayed by pretty words and pretty ideas nearly so much as people who vote over a silly 3AM AD that's got no basis in fact.

I'm sick of all this negativity and sick of people who have nothing better to do than attack each other over 'political candidates' - it distracts us from the facts.

1) we need to get out of Iraq.
2) we need to fix our health care system.
3) we need to stop the genocide in Darfur.
4) we need to bring jobs back to the US and rebuild our economy...

among other things.

Instead of reading these articles, why don't you read each of the candidates' stances and then make an educated decision on who to support. Stop wasting your time and mine.

Hilary is truly scaring me. In what world can a candidate whose running a distant 2nd offer the VP role to the leading candidate? In a parallel world called Hillaryland - that's where. The nerve of this woman.
S H O C K I N G!!!!

On every online news story you will find a posting by 'JACKSMITH'. I can't believe my postings are rarely approved, but Jacksmith gets to "share" the same cut and paste nonsense propaganda. Go figure.

If Obama is the nominee I am voting for McCain. His supporters are nasty and none of them are about change. They are mostly young people who like harassing people who don't like Obama.

Hillary is not that far behind, and there WILL be revotes in Michigan and Flordia.

David . . .

Ann Coulter and Bill Cunningham have said the same thing.

AND McCain's campaign manager has said publically that he will resign if Obama is the nominee b/c he has too much respect for Obama and can't run a negative campaign against him.

Wesley Clark is not supporting Hillary because he thinks she is more qualified to be president it is because he think that
she will pick him for her VP running mate,Remember that he is a retired general but, just because a
person has military experience it doe's not necessarily qualifies that
individual to be commander
in-chief. A wise person need not have to have worn an armed force uniform to direct those who are qualified to carry out a mission it is the nature of
the mission that's most important, Take for instant
the president George W. Bush it's not that he were
so wise in invading iraq and also neithier that he were dumb to the facts,he
knew that with the mentality of the bigots and
idiots in this country he
thought that everybody would stay asleep in ignorance but he's beginning to learn that it's awakining time for those who want to wake-up
and stop being screwed.

jacksmith, there are crossover republicans voting for both, and you got it totally backwards. Those voting for Hillary are the ones thinking *she* would be weaker. Some voted for Obama because they think this might be the last chance to vote against Hillary since Obama would be the nominee. Then some voted for Obama because they truly support him. If anything it shows his broad appeal.

Either way, if a state allows open primary then it's not against rules and it's no scandal. Bottom line is, both got votes from republicans but for diff. reasons, neither side has much to complain.

America should be angry? Well we have been against ourselves in this partisanship for way too long, and Hillary is fanning more of that. That's why it's time for a new chapter. It's not just about Obama, he embodies us as a nation wanting to come together and have constructive politics.

Dear Mr. O.

I understand why you are so confident, but I am asking you to think about who is giving you the confidence. It is coming from the Republicans and they are moving you up for a reason. They want you to be the nom against McCain. Now you have to ask yourself "why"? Put your qualifications to the test. One day you will be president, but now is not the time. We could have 16 years if you come together. We need to put all race, gender, and ego, aside to win. Don't take the bait. We have to outsmart the reps. they are laughing at us.

Re: JackSmith's claim that Republicans are voting for Obama to throw the primary. I have personally heard anectdotal accounts of this. Sadly, my brother was one of them (in Missouri--and Obama won there). I don't know how widespread this is.

jacksmith's comments are so off the mark it's laughable. From the very beginning it was clear that the Rebublican's wanted to face Hillary in the general. In a race between two "establishment" candidates McCain just may have a chance but against a dynamic, young, charismatic leader with a new approach to politics he has none. This country needs a new approach and Senator Obama personifies that. If the Democrats really want the White House then he is the only choice.

Ohhhh! Please! It's just the Obama camp making much a do about nothing. They are the ones putting the negative spin on it. If you read the quotes from Hillary or Bill, without attaching the Obama spin or your passion, then you will see that neither Hillary or Bill suggested a Clinton/Obama ticket over an Obama/Clinton ticket. Clinton is trying to unite the party. Obama comes back as the divider. GET A GRIP everyone.

"DECEPTION" she wrote again! The Clinton's are the most deceptive people God ever created. How in the f***ing world does somebody who is trailing in abysmal 2nd place offering the front-runner a VP position. It's unheard of. Trick-or-treat or some kind of bribery? Actually, both - just another trick by Billary Clinton. If majority of Americans so much wanted Hillary to be their next president, she would have the front-runner by now, but Americans are smart (though not as smart as the Clintons) so choose to vote for another candidate. "Fool me once, shame to you. Fool me twice, shame to me." We all remember that famous quote from Bill Clinton years ago. Americans have chosen not to be fooled twice by the Clintons.

Here's the deal. The Clinton's will do or say anything to win or steal an election just like their cousin, George W. Bush. They're touting this VP offer to trick Obama supporters and other independent voters who are fed up with the Clinton's excesses into voting for her. It's a trap. Please somebody help me understand this because it defies all logic. How can Billary sincerely offer Barack Obama VP position after lying and destroying his character and throwing the kitchen sink at him? Do you really think they're sincere with the American voters (assuming that she miraculous manages to win the nomination) or is it another one of their bottomless bag of shamelss tricks? Give me a break. I was born in the night but not last night!

"...This tells me one thing, when Repubs like these two buffoons are on here cheerleading for Hillary it means they're scared to death of facing Obama in the general election this fall..."
Posted by: 1st SGT Gump | March 10, 2008 2:53 PM

Mr. Gump-
So- when I said "agree with both of them- neither is qualified for anything... "

How does that turn into cheerleading for Hillary?

and I am a Buffoon- ?? really?

Hillary, YOU ARE LOSING...badly!

...and you're so far behind in the delegate count that you basically have no chance of winning...

This womans desperation for power is almost as bad as BushCo's.

If Obama was as far behind as Hillary is now she would be screaming at the top of her lungs for him to drop out.

Posted by: Jimmy Hussein Venom | March 10, 2008 2:00 PM

Jimmy Hussein ain't it the truth. hillary is SO DELUSIONAL. This woman will do anything to get elected and is power hungry to the MAX!!!

"Her delegate count is actually much higher than it shows. And higher than Obama's. HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!"

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

You should be angry America. "This is not a game" (Hillary Clinton)

Sincerely

jacksmith...

Posted by: jacksmith | March 10, 2008 2:32 PM

Now on to you jacksmith.

Dude are you smoking something??? You're living in some kind of political netherworld. Drugs are bad for you jacksmith. Please consider getting help.

You might be an idiot if you don't!!!

"DECEPTION" she wrote again! The Clinton's are the most deceptive people God ever created. How in the f***ing world does somebody who is trailing in abysmal 2nd place offering the front-runner a VP position. It's unheard of. Trick-or-treat or some kind of bribery? Actually, both - just another trick by Billary Clinton. If majority of Americans so much wanted Hillary to be their next president, she would have the front-runner by now, but Americans are smart (though not as smart as the Clintons) so choose to vote for another candidate. "Fool me once, shame to you. Fool me twice, shame to me." We all remember that famous quote from Bill Clinton years ago. Americans have chosen not to be fooled twice by the Clintons.

Here's the deal. The Clinton's will do or say anything to win or steal an election just like their cousin, George W. Bush. They're touting this VP offer to trick Obama supporters and other independent voters who are fed up with the Clinton's excesses into voting for her. It's a trap. Please somebody help me understand this because it defies all logic. How can Billary sincerely offer Barack Obama VP position after lying and destroying his character and throwing the kitchen sink at him? Do you really think they're sincere with the American voters (assuming that she miraculous manages to win the nomination) or is it another one of their bottomless bag of shamelss tricks? Give me a break. I was born in the night but not last night!

Shrillary knows this is her last stand. Her political career is finished after this election. By that time, she will have alienated the majority of her party, she will have called in all her favors (or as I like to call them, her threats)...The fact that Obama would NEVER even dream of asking Hillary to be vice president is proof enough, even if he says they are "friends". Why would he want to be on her ticket and share VP with the witch and Bubba? Although, it would make an excellent sitcom!

I think Obama's response to the VP matter is that the only way she will get the nomination is if she steals the nomination. No more stolen elections. So we don't need to worry about Hillary's VP.

I am disappointed in his response.

The Clintons are far too corrupt. There is an ongoing Fraud lawsuit in California. Clinton has yet to release 8 I repeat 8 years of tax returns!!! When she was running for the Senate she and her current campaign manager HOUNDED Lazio to produce his. Attending Lazio rallies with camcorder in hand harassing him over and over again. Clinton was SUPPOSSED to have provided hers long ago. When asked for them, suddenly Obama is Ken Starr. That just tells us when they ARE revealed there will have to be another Ken Starr. It's about time the DNC, super-delegates, and the American people wake up to the fact that the Clintons ARE A LIABILITY THAT NONE OF THEM CAN AFFORD!!!

I'm not sure about Texas but I do know that Ohio has a closed primary, so it would be real hard for registered republicans to vote for Hillary there, especially when they had a primary of there own. Huck was still a candidate when people chose McCain there.

Second, there are more McCainocrats than there are Obamacans, so don't be too proud of that crossover appeal of yours. We've got more.

If you guys are so mad about open primaries then write your local parties and demand a closed primary. It's not republicans or democrats fault that the primary is open to - shock and disbelief - ALL of the voters.

Coming up Pennsylvania is a closed primary so if Hillary wins there you'll be hard-pressed to blame republicans for that one.

@RFB,

You write: "This contest is far from over..." Unfortunately for Senator Clinton, this contest IS over. She can not win. She is too far behind to get the nomination. The Superdelegates will never subvert the will of the voters (since most of them are elected by.... voters). She had to win big in Texas and Ohio and failed to do it. The race is done. All that is left is HOW it gets done. But the ultimate answer is that Obama will face McCain in the general. The Clinton campaign's refusal to admit defeat is indicative of why she falls short of the Commander in Chief threshold, anyway.

It's about time that Obama put an end to this non-sense about Hillary picking him as VP. This is just like watching "24" on TV, I can't wait to see the next twisted plot from the Billary camp!

Can ANYONE over the age of 40 be SO DENSE they forget the Clinton years were one tawdry, personal pocket-lining scandal after ANOTHER. Since she was FIRST LADY of ARK, her shady financial & legal deals only lined the CLINTONS' pockets. WHY have they always REFUSED to come clean about HRC's MULTI-million $$ specious windfall in "cattle futures." THE COUNTLESS times her voluminous files on MYRIAD MATTERS of disrepute have gone "MISSING" when full disclosure could have ENDED both their careers. WHY did their long time legal advisor, VINCE FOSTER, commit SUICIDE in his WHITE HOUSE OFFICE? All HIS FILES were shredded (LISTED AS "missing") so the Clintons' MISDEEDS and double-dealing would remain HIDDEN. NOTHING about this couple REEKS of anything but SUBTERFUGE. Whitewater land deals, pardoning RICH FELONS and other miscreants FOR QUID pro QUO contributions to the CLINTON "library>"
George HW BUSH;s presidential library WAS YEARS in building -- CLINTON'S was done in RECORD TIME thanks to all his OVERSEAS & felonious rich buddies' favors.
WHO is HRC to malign ANYONE's character? Or DEMAND an "accounting" of ANYBODY ELSE when both Clintons have spent their LIFETIMES avoiding any and all possible scrutiny. EVERYBODY KNOWS "WHAT" they are (trying to) HIDE.
The RNC is SALIVATING at prospects they can unleash THE HORDES of dirty secrets carefully swept UNDER THE rug --- UNTIL the general election.
It beggars the mind and turns my stomach WHENEVER (as often) as HRC pretends to be SO self-righteous. Nixon's DIRTY TRICK Squad had NOTHING on the Clintons' goons.

In addition to the ongoing fraud lawsuit in California' and 8, I repaet 8 years of undisclosed tax returns I submitt the following:

Lesson one: A thief must never call the police to investigate anything.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign suggests that Senator Barack Obama is somehow corrupt because one of his former political donors, Chicago realtor, Tony Rezko is under trial for corruption.

To begin with, one of Senator Hillary Clinton’s past donors Norman Hsu, who gave her $850,000 was a corrupt embezzler who tried to flee and even attempted suicide in the midst of his own corruption trial last year.

Desperate, after Senator Obama had won 11 states in a row and built his insurmountable delegates count which now stands at 150, Senator Clinton decided to focus on sliming Obama. Now nothing is out of bounds.

Many people believe the name “Clinton” is synonymous with “Corruption.” A google search of “Clintons” and “scandal” yields 10,200,000 hits. A search of “Obamas” and “scandal” yields 1,570,000 hits.

The Clinton’s should be the last people to talk about corruption, scandals, and integrity. They are one of the most immoral, amoral, and perhaps corrupt political couples in history. While Senator Obama won’t bring up the issue, even after the Clintons continue “throwing the kitchen sink” at him, some politicians and major newspaper columnists are now beginning to raise questions.

This is what respected Obama supporter and former New Jersey senator Bill Bradley told PBS’s “Newshour,” this past Wednesday: "I think Barack Obama has a much stronger chance of beating John McCain in the general election. I think Hillary is flawed in many ways, and particularly if you look at her husband's unwillingness to release the names of the people who contributed to his presidential library. And the reason that is important -- you know, are there favors attached to $500,000 or $1 million contributions? And what do I mean by favors? I mean, pardons that are granted; investigations that are squelched; contracts that are awarded; regulations that are delayed. These are important questions. The people deserve to know. And we deserve, as Democrats, to know before a nominee is selected, because we don't want things to explode in a general election against John McCain."

The Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan, also writes that Hillary Clinton is “the most divisive figure in the country” and adds that people “have reason to view her as dark, dissembling, thuggish.” She also wonders: “Why aren’t we talking about impeachment, Whitewater and Osama?”

Noonan is obviously referring to the impeachment of Hillary Clinton’s husband, Bill Clinton, who was too busy molesting the intern Monica Lewinsky with a cigar when the red phone was ringing; and she is asking about the Whitewater land deal scandal that also involved the Clintons; and, finally she refers to the fact that commander in chief Bill Clinton waffled when he was provided intelligence of Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts, allowing him to escape.

Senator Clinton says she’s experienced having learned from her husband’s administration. That should be an excellent reason why she shouldn’t pick up the red phone at 3 AM.

What does all this have to do with the current presidential campaign? That’s the question senator Clinton should have done before she launched the “kitchen sink” attacks rather than sticking with the campaign issues.

Lesson two: If you have dirty underwear never call for underwear inspections.

OBAMA MUST BE IN KENYA OR NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE BETWEEN GORE AND BUSH.

GORE WON THE POPULAR VOTE BUT LOST THE PRESIDENCY TO BUSH!

HALLO!

POLITICAL MATH IS DIFFERENT FROM REAL MATH, JUST ASK YOURSELF:
1+1=2 IN OUR WORLD
1+REZKO= A MANSION IN THE OBAMA WORLD!

Obama is dead wrong if he thinks he is winning. Right now he has to win over the super delegates in order to win the nomination. The super delegates have to take into account the fact that Obama has run up is nominal lead in Red states, where dominated urban areas and African Americans. They also have to consider the fact that Hillary has won decisively where it counts, in Blue states. If Hillary can get the super delegates to believe in a Clinton-Obama ticket, Obama will have to accept, or risk splitting the Democratic party.

I hate to say this but Jacksmith is right. I am an Chicagoan living in Texas and,on the Tv news and radio most Republicans said they were going to vote for Hilliary, so they could keep the Democrats fighting. They also wnat Obama to win because in the primaries they are going to put his whole record on display,which in case you did not know is paper thin. Obama has been a Senator for 3yrs and have only introduce one bill. Obama stated he did not vote for NAFTA or the war in Iraq, how could he, he was not in office. That sound like Washington double speak to me.

It does seem a little absurd to suggest someone for VP who is said to not be qualified for President, just in case s/he would have to move up to President for some reason, but on the other hand, how many times has that happened in our history? Mostly, the VP stands by in case there's a tie vote in the Senate.

Anyway, the main point is that Obama has won more states than Hillary. No matter that those states have few electoral votes because they have low populations. And according to some people, it shouldn't matter that most if not all of the states Obama has won were red states. Kids, those states are gonna go for McCain.

It may look good to people who don't know any better, but winning all the red states is no big deal. It doesn't matter who won Texas, cuz I can tell you from living here in TX, that this state is almost 70% Republican, so all those electoral votes are going to McCain no matter if every single registered Democrat who is eligible to vote does so.

What the Democrats need is someone who can win the general election. Not someone who can win the red states when s/he is competing against another Democrat who in the general election isn't going to win anyway. NO DEMOCRAT is going to win Texas in the general election.

So it makes sense to choose someone who will win the blue states and who has a chance in the pivotal states. Texas is not a pivotal state. Wisconsin might be a pivotal state. It was a while back. A pivotal state is one whose population is nearly 50/50 Democrat/Republican, for those who are wondering. The Democrats need a nominee who can win in the pivotal states. Red states mean the population is well over 50% Democrat. Obama needs wins in the blue states, and the pivotal states before he is a feasible candidate.

Do you want another 4 years of Republicans in the White House. For sure if we have McCain, the war will go on. The wealthy will continue to sit on the sidelines while the middle class picks up the tab. There will be no health insurance beyond what we have right now. McCain just voted to send a huge defense contract overseas so that thousands of people here at Boeing and their subsidiaries will be laid off. McCain favors sending jobs overseas and taxing the middle class to death. Do you really want him for Pres? He’s a national hero, don’t get me wrong. He served his country and sat rotting in a Kong Prison for years, but that was yesterday. Today, we need a President who will look out for the little people.

We need a nominee who can win against McCain in the general election next November. Lay off the Cool-aid or soma or whatever you’re on right now and get serious. You don’t have to like the President. You just need someone who can do the job well, looking out for the little people instead of the wealthy who can afford to look out for themselves.

Please stop the personal attacks. You might as well be wearing a neon sign that says you’re a complete idiot when you make them. A good warning to those of us who like to avoid idiots, but not saying much for yourself or your cause. Have a little dignity people. People who resort to personal attacks do so because they haven’t the information and knowledge to support their argument that they need to make a rational, logical argument. It’s all emotional for them. They haven’t a clue about the subject they’re hurling accusations about.

Hillary doesn't have any experience and I hope she doesn't win.

Trace, I didn't realize Illinois was a small state? As for the re-do in Michigan, Obama is likely to be favored. Anyway, Clinton wins primarily states that will vote for either Democrat. Obama is doing better in swing states (like Wisconsin).

Hillary Clinton's continual Obama bashing is just showing her weakness.

When elected President was Bill Clinton, a Governor from Arkansas, qualified to take a 3:00 AM call involving national security?

It was also President Bill Clinton who didn't think Osama Bin Laden was a threat to our national security.

"In other news, the Cubs have asked the Yankees if they'd like to meet in the World Series." HILARIOUS!

I have to agree with Cheryl too, the candidates just need to zip it when it comes to comments of this nature. Make a meaningful statement of be quiet.

I dont know why the candidates fight so hard to win the vote of people on threads like this. After reading some of the abuse that's being thrown around I dont think they'd be too thrilled knowing they have your support. "Hey Barack look, this big mouth jack-@ss can really relate to you". Or, "Hilliary, mighty mouth over here thinks you best speak for her". If there's a movement going on, its more like a 'Bowel' movement than anything else.

Angoose: I second that motion! Obama and Clark!

One definition of the word "SLICK" IS "Superficially attractive but without depth or sound quality". This definition seems to fit both Bill and Hilary Clinton. Our country needs a leader who has "INTELLIGENCE" and that person is Barack Obama.

I dont know why the candidates fight so hard to win the vote of people on threads like this. After reading some of the abuse that's being thrown around I dont think they'd be too thrilled knowing they have your support. "Hey Barack look, this big mouth jack-@ss can really relate to you". Or, "Hilliary, mighty mouth over here thinks you best speak for her". If there's a movement going on, its more like a 'Bowel' movement than anything else.

So, let me clarify this next democratic mess. #2 in her husband's generosity offers #1 to be #2 but she adds a condition to do his homework during the next 5 months in order to get ready to answer her 3 am calls.
"If Democrats had any brains..."

"McCain just voted to send a huge defense contract overseas so that thousands of people here at Boeing and their subsidiaries will be laid off."

This is an error in fact. The Airbus/Northrup Grumman contract will send thousands of jobs to Los Angeles, Minneapolis and almost all of NG's American offices. Airbus only got the deal by partnering with the AMERICAN company.

If Boeing wanted to get the contract they should have put in a MORE COMPETITVE bid rather than trying to rip the taxpayers off. If being against military-industrial waste and graft is wrong, Senator McCain and I don't want to be right.

If you think Boeing didn't try to tilt the playing field on this one you should ask their two former executives who are in jail about what they did. Thank God we have Senator McCain and the people at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington looking out for us the taxpayers, who woudl have had to pay the bill for your regional boodle and graft.

Big states, little states, what the differents does it make. If the big ones are the only ones that count then why bother haveing the "small states" participate. Last time It takes all states and every vote to win. If I were from a "small state" I would be hurt to think the media and Hillary didn't think my vote mattered. Remember Ohio put Bush over the top last time. This is the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA where every state small populations or large count.
Those of us who are Obama supporters have been accused of drinking the koolaide. You Clinton supporters must be passing the pipe.

There is documented truth to JackSmith's claims about Republicans ginning up the vote for Obama here:

http://republicansforobama.org/?q=node/359

Fact is Hillary is supported by more Democrats. Hillary is stronger in states that will be needed to win in November. Sorry, but Obama's "strength" is illusory.

I think Hillary and her Billary and her campaign have been drinking the Spitzer kool-aide! Wake up dreamgirl, you ain't in a position to be offering Obama anything other than offering him the exact time and day you will be dropping out! Go Obama! VOTE OBAMA MISSISSIPPI & PENNSYLVANIA!!!

UMMM....FYI OBAMA WON ILLINOIS. Illinois is NOT a small state.
Thank-you.

Just what is Obama's stance on the issues? Hmmmmm... As much as I have been following this race since it started 1 1/2 years ago, he has not come out with his platform yet.

Can you imagine the Oval Office battle resulting from a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton match? These two are pugilists. Keep them in the same ring for four years and they'll pummel each other to death. Neither one will be able to answer the phone at 3 a.m.

Either Clinton or Obama, who cares it's the same package, but with a different running mate, PLEASE!

Obama is unqualified, but Hillary and her aides have made it impossible to vote for her either. Looks like the only sensible candidate is McCain, unless his folks suggest Hillary or Obama as VP!

CLAIM: With all due respect, I've won twice as many states as Sen. Clinton. I've won more of the popular vote than Sen. Clinton.

TRUTH: MORE Popular votes?? Did he say that?

If Obama is the nominee I am voting for McCain. His supporters are nasty and none of them are about change. They are mostly young people who like harassing people who don't like Obama.

Hillary is not that far behind, and there WILL be revotes in Michigan and Flordia.

Posted by: Jake501 | March 10, 2008 3:45 PM

I AGREE!!! I KNOW MCCAIN WOULD BEAT WHO WE HAVE, BUT WE NEED TO END THIS WAR NOW!!!

The headline should read "Hillary tells Obama to 'go to the back of the ticket".

The Clintons' colors become more true with each passing week...I am totally turned off by them dragging this nomination process into the mud. Hill - you lost my vote. Go away.

wow... billary actually believes people are dumb enough to buy this weak tactic? that in itself show very little respect to our intelligence. she is behind in delegates and is losing in the popular vote by far more. now she's trying to use clever wordplay. c'mon.. nothing but a negative campaign and she's the one that cries about being treated unfair by all? and as for the suggestion of republicans voting for obama as a weaker candidate. rush limbaugh stated on his show for texans and ohioans to vote for hillary for that very reason. get your facts straight, people! i've heard more republicans willing to cross sides for barack and not hillary.

The delegate totals as of today:

Obama: 1553
Clinton:1438

Can someone forward this to the Clinton campaign so they understand they're not winning? I think you need to be in 1st place to even begin discussing potential VPs. What a nutbag.

Obama is ahead in delegates about 1550 to 1440 out of 2025 to win nomination at the Convention, and if she wins Pennsylvania, Florida, etc., and

he wins N. Carolina, Indiana, Michigan, et al., they'll still be neck and neck.

So why not let the Convention in August pick two national tickets--
Hillary can be the nominee in all the states she won in the primaries [Texas is negotiable] and
Barack can run in the states he won and

then let the Electoral College pick a President in November-December.

[And let Nader run in Maine.]

Get lost Hillary, you're a sore loser, you always have been and you always will be. You remind me of BushCo.

OBAMA 08!!!

Please help, I'm confused. Either Sen. Clinton lacks the critical judgement required to choose a qualified VP or she has just confirmed that in her administration political considerations trump national security, economic health, etc., etc. Which is it? Anyone?

Second, there are more McCainocrats than there are Obamacans, so don't be too proud of that crossover appeal of yours. We've got more.
If you guys are so mad about open primaries then write your local parties and demand a closed primary. It's not republicans or democrats fault that the primary is open to - shock and disbelief - ALL of the voters.
Coming up Pennsylvania is a closed primary so if Hillary wins there you'll be hard-pressed to blame republicans for that one.

Posted by: Jeff | March 10, 2008 4:06 PM

Really?

Is that why McCain and his cheerleaders (you) are so afraid of running against Obama in the general election?

You coulda' fooled me, Jeffy.

You Clinton supporters are just too dang funny. You say Obama hasn't won a big state. Last time I checked Illinois was a big state. You say Obama, hasn't won and "important" state, well last time I checked Connecticut and Missouri were important swing states for Dems. You say, he only wins red states and those are states that can't be won in the real election. Umm last time I checked Texas was a red state and umm I doubt it will turn blue in the real election. Answer me this, what does it say about Hillary's ability to lead and manage when it is her campaign that almost ran out of money, it is her campaing that has switched key people more often than one can count, it is her campaign that has had to constantly change their message, for it was qualified, then it was she will bring real change, now it is she is a fighter. The Obama campaign with sound strategy and excellent organization hasn't had these issues. Make one wonder doesn't it, if she is the experienced one than why is it her camp has had all the missteps, Bill in S.C., this whole VP thing, etc. Can any Hillary supporter give me the reasononing behind voting for the inconsistent candidate versus the consistent one?

John E, to be quite honest I'm not afraid of either democrat candidate. Both have a difficult road to their nomination and will be weakened by the time they get to McCain, anyway.

Look on any thread and you'll see comments critical of Hillary such as "why is it always Clinton-Obama? Doesn't she know he has more delegates" on them.

It's funny. If Obama offered a VP for Clinton, voters can understand. Now the underdog Clinton said she can offer a VP to someone, that's impossible because she is a losser. One thing is for sure, Obama will be our president.

Is anyone else getting sick of hearing Obama? What an arrogant jerk.

It appears the Clinton camp has adopted the "if we talk like we won the nomination then everyone will start to believe us" position.
They keep talking like they have won and that everyone is trying to persuade them to include Obama on the ticket. The last I saw, Hillary was trailing in the popular vote, delegates, states won (although according to Hillary you are not important unless you live in one of the important 7 states, but not Illinois) and was about to get her @$$ whipped in Mississippi.
If Hillary gets to the convention and doesn't win is she going to stand in the corner , cover her ears and yell "la,la,la,la,la,la" ad nauseum in her nervous breakdown?

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick would be a better VP if Hillary gets the nomination.

Deval wrote the original speeches and has good ideas that are his own. He also has some state experience.

Obama would stab Hillary in the back much like Edwards did to Kerry. He would back channel the Republicans or the Canadians if it suited him.

Something is missing in all of these arguments.

If Senator Clinton becomes President, who will her VP be?

BILL.

Not in title, but in everything else.

The poor schmuck who has the VP job in name will undoubtedly be playing second fiddle to her husband.

Senator Obama will be be in a position to accomplish more in the Senate than he would as VP. This is one offer he should refuse.

Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have advantages and disadvantages, as do any political figures with any type of past, voting record, etc. However, they strengthen each other's weak spots and together would make a viable team. I am one of the people who would welcome seeing them on the same ticket in November.

It's too bad so many people snipe about each of these candidates, especially considering the Snopes factor in some of the comments I've seen posted. So much of this has been hyped by the media in the past. They will do anything for a story.

Now that Barack Obama is running, there are all kinds of rumors about his 'scandalous' past. Give me a break. He's a pretty sincere guy (for a politician, which I realize isn't a huge endorsement - lol) who made one bad real estate deal that is coming back to haunt him in this election.

Similarly, Hillary Clinton is a brilliant Senator who committed the fatal error of voting for a war she really didn't want to support. I suspect she did it for the same reason she voted for other asinine bills that year; she was a new Senator and was goaded into voting along with the crowd as many junior Senators are. This has come back to haunt her.

Despite these unfortunate occurrences on the parts of both candidates, they're both intelligent, thoughtful, viable candidates for the Presidency.

I have to add that I'm incredulous that anyone dares to put forth prejudices such as "Are we ready for a woman to be President?". Are we ready??? The real question should be, Why haven't we ever seriously pursued this before? It is all too obvious that other countries have had strong guidance from their female leaders as well as male leaders. It is absolutely disgusting that allegedly democratic Americans are questioning a person's political feasibility because of gender. Shame on those posting such bigoted tripe!

Does Obama get it, he can win (and neither can Hillery) with the remaining delegates. He maybe we wining but he can not win unless there is a deal and she is offering one. He might not like it but someone has to give and the Clintons don't give in.

Lacking standing is lawyer speak for not being able to sue in a trial. Clinton has standing in a campaign.

Blaming Clinton for the mess with the nomination (which is the fault of the DNC) is sexist in itself and similar to psychiatrist in the olden days blaming the mother for everything when the father could have been the worst. It is blaming the victim. Clinton is a victim of the fact that Florida and Michigan wasn't in the race from the get-go as she would have won both of those and this would be a dramatically different campaign had they counted and people knew they counted from the beginning. She would have won both.

Obama folks are so good at name calling. Obama is a uniter (so he says) not a divider. Clinton supporters and Obama supporters, insults will not sway anyone. This forum has turned into a big brawl.

I love the Obama/Clark Ticket

If HRC wins the rest of the states 60% to 30% BHO would still be ahead and need 33% of the superdelegates to her needing about 75%

Hillary must have been watching the movie "Driving Miss Daisy". Someone needs to tell her she's NOT Miss Daisy. The arrogance of the Clintons is only exceeded by their corruption.

ABC (Anybody But Clinton[s])

Talking about experience, Bush had four years of experience as President in 2004, how did that work out the last three years?

Obama is unqualified, but Hillary and her aides have made it impossible to vote for her either. Looks like the only sensible candidate is McCain, unless his folks suggest Hillary or Obama as VP!

Posted by: John D | March 10, 2008 5:24 PM

Why do you even comment when it's so obvious you have blinders on and never met a democrat you lied. Don't you have something better to do with yer time. Keep drinking the Kool-Aid and prepare to cry in November when McCain get's blown out of the water. This man only appeals to curmudgeons and a select few people who want him to be what a once was but is no longer.

OK I AM WRONG I AM A LOSER...

hahaha!
This is getting...fun now!

All the obamacrats going "The repubs are voting for Hillary! Rush says so!"
You're only saying that NOW cause you got caught with you caucuses down!

The Hillraisers intecepted your emails, kids, the ones telling in detail how Republicans could be "Democrats for a Day" to swing the Texas election "to get rid of that b*t*h Hillary!" I have a stack myself FROM Obamacrats TO republicans and ALSO FROM the RNC giving the same line and the same detailed instructions...

Consorting with the...Enemy.
Shame on you Barack Obama!

You're NOT going to fool us McGovern Boomers with THAT old saw. It's a ploy that dates back to...Tricky Dick.

But, just days before the Texas election, I got one from a frantic Republican who, seeing Barack win this way once too often, was BEGGING other republicans to vote for Hillary cause...

"that Obama menace MUST be stopped!!!!
(to preserve Our Way of Life!)

Oh!Oh! Backfired on ya...didn't it!

hahahaha!

Sure, you can still run over the old ladies with walkers to grab a couple more caucuses by what...a few thousand votes...in a state with NO Democrats like...Wyoming...so you can SAY you won BIG (7 to Hill's 5)

But I don't think you can rely on another...Wisconsin...where Hillary got MORE Votes that ALL the Republican candidates combined and STILL lost, (Bill won it easily...twice. Life was VERY good here...with Bill.)

If The republicans in Wisconsin were NOT voting for themselves
And they were NOT voting for Hill...

(hint: the Reublicans vote for the Dem they can...beat)

And in all these states Obama claims he "won"?

They were voting for...your guy.

This is great. If they (Obama & Clinton) continue their play-ground fighting, the only choice in Nov. will be McCain. The most important factor in this race is defending the American people, Mccain did it...did Hillary and Obama?

An OPEN LETTER TO Barack Obama:

>> Recent Press Reports say :

Obama ridicules notion of VP slot. I think it's premature, he said of accepting the second spot on the ticket.

Well not really!!

You are not ready for prime time yet! A powerful VP slot would give you the exposure and maturity you need to EARN your right to hold down one of the most important jobs in the world. You have had a spectacular rise, it is true . . . leap-frogging and eloquently talking your way to where you are now.

Russian, Venezuelan, Iranian, Chinese, and Palestinian leaders will make mince meat out of you !!!

If ever you even get past McCain (which is un likely).

Just sit down and think about what the Republicans did to a true war hero in 2004, and what they did to a future Nobel Prize winner in 2000!

Join an unstoppable Dream Team!!!

Take a STEP BACK and look at the “big picture”!!!

Barack Obama must work out a VP deal with a commitment (written guarantees / detailed working papers) that his role will be MUCH MORE than that of the traditional VP, much more that that of key advisor, much more that just being a key influencer on staffing of Cabinet Slots and Supreme Court appointments. He will be a truly powerful VP!

Your hubris and wit might, at this critical juncture for the Democrats cause you and your wildly enthusiastic team of supporters to be short sighted.

Just think, if it is change that you REALLY want … would not hooking up with Hillary, bringing a huge majority of into BOTH houses of Congress on your joint coat tails be the way to do it???!!!???

It is now your moment . . .

either seize it in an intelligent way, as a path to the white house (in 4 to 8 years), or squander it away on a miasmic dream.

For no matter who you choose for a running mate, you are doomed to failure!

And even if you miraculously get into the White House, with a split do nothing Congress to work with, you will be just like Jimmy Carter. (By the way . . . I admire Jimmy, and the wild enthusiasm he also generated . . . but Jimmy has been a much better former president then president).

From Ladyvoter...."Blaming Clinton for the mess with the nomination (which is the fault of the DNC) is sexist in itself and similar to psychiatrist in the olden days blaming the mother for everything when the father could have been the worst."

LadyVoter, my you are naive...The Clintons, have the judges, lawyers and the majority of the Democratic party in their back pockets. Mrs. Bubba was just too egomanaical to think a black senator from Illinois could rain on her parade. The only problem is, all their threats, money and extortion can't make this one go away!

Yikes. Do you think Hillary will give Mrs. Spitzer some pointers on how to stand by your shameless philanderer of a husband?

I am wrong OK I AM A POOR LOSER....VOTE OBAMA HE IS THE BETTER CANADATE.

For once I agree with Hillary - Barack isn't qualified to be VP ... he's OVER qualified. I back Barack 110% and truly believe he is absolutely the right candidate for the presidency. The US is ready for Change.

Obama needs to drive the point that THE WAR IN IRAQ IS HAVING SERIOUS NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON OUR ECONOMY and that those who voted for the war should be to blame, in part, for the state of the US economy.

Look how the WAR IN IRAQ is affecting the US economy...

$3,000,000,000 - $3 billion PER WEEK! – That is the amount we're paying for the Iraq War– money that should have been used here, at home.

Add to this:

Interest. We are financing the war with borrowed money (e.g. treasuries) so in actuality, we're the war is costing the United States MORE than $ 3 billion PER WEEK.

Higher oil and energy prices. Instability in Iraq is adding roughly 30 dollars per barrel as a premium.

High oil prices mean high utility bills. Due to high oil prices, demand shifts to other sources of energy - nat gas, coal, etc. - and greater demand will raise the equilibrium price of all sources of energy -- Can you say high energy bills?

Inflation. Higher oil prices (a raw material used in the production of many goods, fertilizers, gasoline, diesel, plastics, etc.) mean higher prices of goods and services -- Can you say INFLATION?

Higher oil prices mean a higher trade deficit because most of our oil comes from foreign sources. A higher trade deficit means more money is leaving the country than is coming into the country -- Can you say 'Goodbye money!'

Our dollar is weak, weak, weak. Since we have a trade deficit, the value of goods and services we import exceeds the value of goods we export. You know that foreign car you're thinking of buying or the computer you're using, or that trip abroad you've been thinking of taking....well, guess what? It is going to cost more, Ceteris Peribus, because the dollar is weak, weak, weak.

Lastly, how do you think the world views our country because of this war? The evidence was weak and circumstantial, yet we rushed into war with Iraq thanks to Hillary’s authorization.

"Second, there are more McCainocrats than there are Obamacans, so don't be too proud of that crossover appeal of yours. We've got more."

Posted by: Jeff | March 10, 2008 4:06 PM

Jeff, please cite the source of the numbers you used to make this statement, which sure seems to be represented as fact. Thanks.

Dear Senator Obama
please disregard the above comments of Hal Peters, do not be tempted by the dark side of the force.

Trust you're feeling Barack! Obama 08!

When did Hillary Clinton deliver health-care reform or demonstrate her economic wisdom and foresight while Alan Greenspan was warning of irrational exuberance as the subprime housing loans were created and pandered during her husband's administration and her husband supported China's entry into the World Trade Organization without any conditions such as protecting the environment or labor and property rights to levels that are comparable to western standards?

Today China is not only a leading contributor to environmental pollution and global warming, it's also driving oil and other commodity prices,stealing our intellectual property,spying on the U.S. Department of Defense and the Pentagon, and has one of the worst human rights records.

If experience, wisdom and judgment may be relied upon to judge a presidential candidate's abilities to solve problems, then let's look at the records of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

2005 - While Barack Obama promoted a restoration of balance between work and wealth and criticized special interests for distorting U.S. tax codes, Hillary Clinton and her husband liquidated their blind trust of the nearly $50 million amassed during their years in public office.

2002 - While Barack cautioned that without clear rationale an invasion of Iraq would encourage the worst impulses of the Arab world and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda, Hillary told Larry King she didn't regret her vote on the Iraq war resolution because like the Bush administration, the Clinton administration viewed Saddam Hussein as a threat to the international community.

1999 - While Barack secured bipartisan support for health-care reform and passage of low-income tax credits and child care subsidies in the Illinois legislature, Hillary supported her husband's Iraq "regime change" policy in order to divert public attention from the president's marital, legal and ethical infidelities.

1989 - While Barack Obama served as the Harvard Law Review's first black president, Hillary Clinton then wife of the Arkansas governor received payments from a law firm that was doing the state's business and received board of director payments from Wal-Mart where she remained silent about Wal-Mart's anti-labor union practices.

1979 - While Barack Obama was actively involved in the South African divestment movement to end apartheid, Hillary reaped profits of almost 10,000% in the futures markets and left taxpayers with her real-estate losses in the Savings & Loan bailout.

In Hillary's eight (8) years in the Senate, the Congressional Record (www.thomas.gov) shows she "sponsored" only two (2) pieces of legislation that were presented to the president for signature. The first piece of legislation (S. 1241) was to establish a historic site in New York state, the second (S. 3613) was to name a U.S. Postal Service building.

At 3:00 AM who is Hillary gonna call in a national crisis? GHOSTBUSTERS? Without any attachment to a position and no leadership qualities or principles to guide her in a time of national crisis, Hillary like her husband, would need to first conduct a poll to determine what is in her political interest before committing to any national decision.

It's refreshingly nice to see the better angels of America's character prevailing as voters reject the racial, religious and ethnic slurs being spewed by the divisive supporters of Clinton, Limbaugh and Hannity.

As a Republican-leaning independent, I will vote for Barack Obama if he is the Democratic nominee running against John McCain but I will not vote for Hillary Clinton.

I'm taking a chance that Obama doubters and Clinton supporters will read the following, given the fact that the media brands most of her supporters as under-achievers and under-educated...

LADIES FIRST:

Records of these two candidates should be scrutinized in order to make an informed decision.

Senator Clinton, who has served only one full term - 6 yrs.- and another year campaigning, has managed to author and pass into law - 20 - twenty pieces of legislation in her first six years.
These bills can be found on the web site of the Library of Congress http://www.th omas. loc.gov/, but to save you trouble, I'll post them here for you.
1. Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site.
2. Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month.
3. Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Honor.
4. Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall.
5. Name courthouse after James L. Watson.
6. Name post office after John A. O'Shea.
7. Designate Aug. 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
8. Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
9. Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of his death.
10. Congratulate the Syracuse Univ. Orange Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.
11. Congratulate the Le Moyne College Dolphins Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.
12. Establish the 225th Anniversary of the American Revolution Commemorative Program.
13. Name post office after Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda.
14. Honor Shirley Chisholm for her service to the nation and express condolences on her death.
15. Honor John J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, firefighters who lost their lives on duty. Only five of Clinton 's bills are, more substantive. 16. Extend period of unemployment assistance to victims of 9/11.
17. Pay for r city projects in response to 9/11? 18. Assist landmine victims in other countries.
19. Assist family caregivers in accessing affordable respite care.
20. Designate part of the National Forest System in Puerto Rico as protected in the wilderness preservation system.

There you have it, the fact's straight from the Senate Record.

Now, I would post those of Obama's, but the list is too substantive, so I'll mainly categorize. During the first - 8 - eight years of his elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.

His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These included?**the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 - became law,?**The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act,- became law,&n bsp; **The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,?**The 2007 Government Ethics Bill,- became law,?**The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, In committee, and many more.

In all, since entering the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096.
An impressive record, for someone who supposedly has no record according to some who would prefer that this comparison not be made public.
He's not just a talker.
He's a doer.

Pass it on....It's impressive

Hillary Clinton's campaign did not plan for the primaries after Super Tuesday, because she took it for granted that she was the presumptive nominee.
In 2002, she also took it for granted that the Iraq war would go smoothly and quickly, just as the neo-cons said it would.
This is a key indicator of her judgement, and why I cannot support her.
The Democratic party deserves a nominee who doesn't have to give a convoluted explanation about how they "voted for the war before they voted against it."
Barack Obama had the good judgement to oppose it from the start!

In South Carolina it was Black vs White

In the SW and Texas, it was Black vs Brown

In the NE it was Women vs Men

And now in the deep South, "BILL" Clinton continues to divide by claiming that Hillary would carry poor "rural voters", while Obama would carry "Urban upscale voters".

Why is there such an emphasis to divide people into demographics?

Hillary doesn't have a shot in heaven in winning in November.
Barack is the democrats best bet.
Obama 08'!
Some republicans and Independents HAVE To cross over in order for a democrat to win. It wouldn't be for Hillary .Trust me.

For everyone that says that only the big blue states matter, does anyone seriously think that if Obama is the nominee that the state of California, New York, etc. is suddenly going to go, as a whole, Republican in the national election? The races in big states have been CLOSE contentions between the two candidates. Regardless of who the Democrats nominate, this will not be the case. In fact, to be competitive in a national election, it is the swing-states that matter and the ability to appeal to YES some fed-up Republicans and independents. Hilary polarizes half the country - so who is REALLY more likely to attract some new voters rather than the same old democratic establishment that failed to deliver the White House to John Kerry? If we're going to debate, fine, but let's at least be realistic!

Obama’s Church website is below, here is some of what they say;
We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black.
Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization.
A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA.

http://www.tucc.org/black_value_system.html

Obama said this 2 months ago….that U.S. troops in Afghanistan are "just air-raiding villages and killing civilians.
But it's also an entirely inaccurate condemnation of the efforts of the men and women of the United States military who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan."
NOW TODAY TO WIN TEXAS THIS IS WHAT HE HAD TO SAY, SO WHICH IS IT OBAMA , NOT PROUD OR PROUD WITH THE MILITARY?
Addressing 60 veterans and their families at a town hall meeting at American Legion Post 490 in Houston, Obama said, "Veterans are bearing the brunt of bad decision-making by our leaders."The president's job is "to keep people safe. ... It means deploying our military wisely," he continued. "War should not be the first resort. ... lt should not be based on politics." He promised to improve health care and other services for veterans if elected. "We are not serving our troops and our veterans as well as they have been serving us," Obama said.
OK OBAMA OUR YOU UPSET OR PROUD OF OUR TROOPS? WHICH ONE, LOL!

"Hell hath no fury like a woman's scorn". That is a borrowed quote lest I be accused of plagiarism. Ludicrous for the desperate loser to be offering 2nd place to the frontrunner, this woman will not only wreck the democratic party but will set American women's chances of running for President back another 50 or so years, she seems so bitter, unstable, irrational and quite spiteful. There are many QUALIFIED female guvs like Kansas guv Kathleen Sebelius or Janet Napolitano who have more experience, character and decency than this woman. They got elected on thrie own merit not on some famous "has been" philandering husband.

"Hell hath no fury like a woman's scorn". That is a borrowed quote lest I be accused of plagiarism. Ludicrous for the desperate loser to be offering 2nd place to the frontrunner, this woman will not only wreck the democratic party but will set American women's chances of running for President back another 50 or so years, she seems so bitter, unstable, irrational and quite spiteful. There are many QUALIFIED female guvs like Kansas guv Kathleen Sebelius or Janet Napolitano who have more experience, character and decency than this woman. They got elected on their own merit not on some famous "has been" philandering husband.

http://gizmodo.com/365401/3m-on-verge-of-releasing-mini-mobile-projector-possible-300+400-price-tag

Look, only an idiot would vote for McCain. What has happened the last 8 years that we've had a Republican in the White House?

Honestly, this race is about whether Clinton or Obama will be the next president.

That's the only way I can figure that Democrats are ripping each other apart in this way. It's pathetic.

I don't like Hillary, but I'm certainly not going to call her or her supporters names. I will call Republicans names because look at the mess they got us into.

I would vote Hillary if she got the nomination, though I prefer Barack. But there is NO WAY I'm going to vote for another Republican for the White House EVER again. Yes, I voted Bush in 2000, and let me tell you how sick it makes me to think that I did.

did i miss something as i read hiilary's statement she does not say who should be on top of the ticket. she said the time when people could vote for both may be soon.

Is anyone besides me worried that the Democratic party will do all it can to steal the nomination from Obama?