EILEEN12:46PMMay 6th 2008

!!!!!!!!!HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT!!!!!!!!!

sblum12:47PMMay 6th 2008

i agree with greg,

obama is over with

Katherine12:51PMMay 6th 2008

Hillary 08!!

C'MON NC and INDIANA, come out and vote for Hillary.

Save AMERICA from Obama-drama!

Hillary for President! She loves America!!

luckyday12:55PMMay 6th 2008

Hillary all the way we need a strong women to strighten this mess out lets not leave it to someone with ideals but just talk vote hillary 2008 lets get this show on the road

TJ12:58PMMay 6th 2008

THE LEADING POLLS OF ZOGBY AND CNN ARE SHAMS ANYWAY AND WE KNOW IT... JOHN OR JAMES ZOGBY ARE OBAMA SURROGATES AND WE ALL KNOW IT.
WE KEEP OUR FINGERS CROSSED
OBAMA IS DOWN AND DIRTIED UP IN THE MUD WITH JEREMIAH WRIGHT AND MY GIRL HILLARY IS SITTING PRETTY.
THERE IS A PA COMING TO IN AND NC NEAR YOU...

OXOXO
TJ, THE OBAMAMANIA BUSTER.

Diane12:58PMMay 6th 2008

Wake up Obama supports..read the writing on the wall.


http://rezkowatch.blogspot.com/

Brutuss1001:03PMMay 6th 2008

Obama can't do anything right if it's not first rehearsed, or planned.

It seems to me that the Democratic Party decided a long time ago that Obama was going to be the nominee no matter what that dummass does. They believe [or have been strongly convinced by none other than black special interest groups... tada] that if they don't put Obama in the nomination seat that there will be an uprise in the black communities... are they wrong? It seems to me that everyone is bitching about "what if they TAKE the nomination from Obama?" Well I say, "that's no different than HANDING it to him if he doesn't deserve it, or even worse, just because he's half-black"

During these crisis times for Obama, Superdelegates are backing Obama. Why? And I 'm not talking about the bullshit from Obama supporters. Andrews [from Indiana] doesn't even know Obama; has spoken to him only a couple times. Yet he moves to Obama during his worst week of the campaign, and just before the Primary in Indiana. Why? Because the DEMS see that Hillary could win this thing and they are in a panic to sway the voters back toward Obama. If this was a white candidate pulling this crap, they would have hung him out to dry a long time ago. Lose the Black Vote? YES they are afraid, but not of losing the black vote.... they're afraid, like Al Sharpton has threatened, of riots, and demonstrations, and fires and all sorts of other uncivilized-animalistic behaviors. Look.... prejudice is prejudice...

Taking the nomination from Obama is just as Messed-Up as giving it to him. Obama's wife now has to attend his side from now on to make sure he doesn't screw up again [like his interview with Katie Curic]. Michelle Obama actually cut him off in mid-sentence to answer a question FOR him. If this guy can't handle his pastor OR his wife... damn! How can ANYONE say he can run a country. She's gonna take control of all of this, because she doesn't have faith that he can do it right. She's gonna micro-manage his campaign now, because NOBODY'S GONNA RUIN HER CHANCE OF GETTING INTO THE WHITE HOUSE.

Ms Obama... why are you talking? He's running for Pres, not you. Besides you worked with William Ayer's wife/girlfriend for a couple years at that lawfirm of yours after she was released on bail. (don't believe it, look up Bernadine Dohrn) How do we know that's not why you introduced your husband to the Ayers couple shortly afterwards? [Or maybe that's just what we're SUPPOSED to believe]

bert1:03PMMay 6th 2008

Greg,
hear, hear! let us hope and pray that the voters are really listening and seeing this ass (b.o.) for what he really is and lets hope the superdels are paying attention too. It will be nice if they would get off thier asses and count MI and FL too, otherwise they will have stolen the election from Hillary, and I and millions like me will be voting a different party for the first time. this notion that you should vote for your party no matter who the dnc and media cram down your throat is the stupidest thing I've heard yet, I CAN NOT and WILL NOT vote for an anti-american bigot EVER!!! GOOD LUCK, HILLARY!!!

lmay1:07PMMay 6th 2008

Good luck Hillary!!! Keep it close in NC and pull ahead in Indiana!!

We are behind you all the way to the convention!!

If you don't make it..we are voting for Mccain!! No doubt. For America!!!

THIS WOMAN CONSTANTLY LIES!1:14PMMay 6th 2008

Three years ago, during an appearance on CBS, Sen. Hillary Clinton stated that she agreed with the overarching premise of John McCain's Iraq policy: that America's commitment to the war shouldn't be based on time frames but rather on the level of troop casualties. She even cited, as McCain now regularly does, that the United States would be well suited to follow a model for troop presence based on South Korea, Japan, or Germany.

"Senator McCain made the point earlier today, which I agree with, and that is, it's not so much a question of time when it comes to American military presence for the average American; I include myself in this. But it is a question of casualties," said Clinton. "We don't want to see our young men and women dying and suffering these grievous injuries that so many of them have. We've been in South Korea for 50-plus years. We've been in Europe for 50-plus. We're still in Okinawa with respect to protection there coming out of World War II."

The quote, which resurfaced on liberal websites late Sunday night, underscores both the evolution of Clinton's stance on Iraq and the war itself.

Three years and many casualties later, Clinton insists, unequivocally, that American troops should be brought home at a rate of one to two brigades a month over the course of 16 months, and that a residual force be left to deal with national security issues. Asked recently if, as president, she would stick to that plan even if conditions on the ground suggested the need for an armed U.S. presence, Howard Wolfson offered a definitive, "yes." Asked to discuss the 2005 remarks, Phil Singer, another Clinton spokesman, told The Huffington Post:

"As both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama have noted, the situation in Iraq has dramatically deteriorated since 2005 and now we are in the midst of sectarian violence. While she has always supported a limited number of residual forces to protect our embassy and go after terrorists, unlike Senator McCain, Senator Clinton will start bringing our troops home when she is President and end the war."

While his shift is not as stark, Sen. Barack Obama has also moved towards a more aggressive anti-Iraq war position since announcing his intention to run for the Oval Office. Shortly after entering Congress, for instance, he said he "believed that U.S. forces are still a part of the solution in Iraq." He told the Chicago Tribune in July of 2004, that "There's not much of a difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage." His voting record since becoming a senator, moreover, has been almost identical to Clinton's.

In fact, observers note, the transformation of both Clinton and -- to a lesser extent -- Obama's war criticism is not simply a product of their White House bids, but also a political and public opinion shift that took place over the past few years.

"The public made a decision over the course of 2006 that we weren't winning. And I think what happened with U.S political support for the war, as the public came to the impression that things weren't going well, casualties started looking like squandered lives and support started drying up," said Steve Biddle, a senior fellow for defense at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Nevertheless, Clinton's appearance on CBS does provide a telling window into just how long a road she has traveled on the issue of Iraq.

Indeed, her initial vote to authorize the war has been hammered by Obama throughout the primary. And around the time of her CBS interview, Clinton was dismissing the efficacy of a troop withdrawal plan that she now supports.

"We don't want to send a signal to the insurgents, to the terrorists that we are going to be out of here at some, you know, date certain," she said on Meet The Press, during an appearance with McCain. "I think that would be like a green light to go ahead and just bide your time. We want to send a message of solidarity. And in addition, I would hope that at this point now, we could get more international support. It is not in anyone's interests, not, you know, the people in this region, in Europe or elsewhere around the world, for the Iraqi government to be brought down before it even can get itself together by violent insurgents. So it's not only a U.S. commitment, I think and hope that there should be commitment from others as well."

Three years later, Clinton has, seemingly, done a 180. How to explain the evolution? For starters, when she appeared on Face the Nation she had just traveled to Iraq and witnessed the country's first election - a process deemed by many observers, though not war critics, as a key turning point in America's mission. In addition, while there were unacceptable levels of violence in the country at the time, there was not yet then an overwhelming consensus that Iraq had descended into civil war.

Nevertheless the difference between her 2005 remarks and those on the campaign trail are stark. So much so, that recently she criticized McCain for pursuing a long-term presence in Iraq and touted herself as the lone candidate who can end the war, all in one statement.

"Sen. [Barack] Obama holds up his original opposition to the war on the campaign trail, but he didn't start working aggressively to end the war until he started running for president. So when he had a chance to act on his speech, he chose silence instead," Clinton told an audience at George Washington University. "President Bush is determined to continue his failed policy in Iraq until he leaves office. And Sen. [John] McCain will gladly accept the torch and stay the course, keeping troops in Iraq for up to 100 years if necessary."

HELPGOD1:15PMMay 6th 2008

HELLO HELLO AMERICA, THIS IS THE RIGHT TIME TO CHANGE IF YOU ARE ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE 80.1% OF THE WHITES POPULATION OF THE U.S.A.

IT IS TIME FOR YOU TO START THINKING ABOUT TAKING THIS COUNTRY BACK
------ GO OUT AND VOTE!!!
THIS COUNTRY THAT HAS THIS GIANT POPULATION OF WHITES CAN NEVER LOSE AN ELECTION IF YOU GO AND VOTE.
COULD YOU IMAGINE TO HAVE A BLACK PRESIDENT AND
"THE DEVIL REV.WRIGHT VICE PRESIDENT"???
'RUNNING THIS COUNTRY? WITH OVER 80% OF WHITES?

IF YOU DON'T GO AND VOTE THIS WILL HAPPEN SO DON'T CRY LATER.
THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY IS IN YOUR HANDS. DON'T FORGET THAT HILLARY IS AMERICAN CHRISTIAN AND FRIEND SHE DESERVES TO RUN THIS COUNTRY,

IF THE BLACKS ARE RACIST CAN'T WE BE RACIST TOO

Illinois Dem1:18PMMay 6th 2008

May God Bless America!!!!!!!

Our country is not perfect, but it is OUR COUNTRY. The likes of Barack Obama with all of his associations should not be given the privilege to rule the USA.

HILLARY 08

Diana1:26PMMay 6th 2008

Yes - go HILLARY you are our future - NO to ODRAMA

DEE1:32PMMay 6th 2008

Are you rearing your racist head & forgetting all of the dirty illegal stuff the Clintons have done and are still doing? I know some of your best friends are......yea sure.

Have you heard if one illegal or unethical thing that OBAMA (the man not his friends) has does during this entire campaign? NO, IF those slimy Clintons had some mud to sling about anything he has done personally they would have done it BUT THEY HAVE NONE. Mr. Obama is too much of a gentleman to wallow in the mud with them!
YOU ARE PROBABLY EXPERIENCING A BOUT WITH HIDDEN RACISM Dude & Dudettes.

LETS TALK ABOUT THE WHITE BOYS1:35PMMay 6th 2008

(CNN) -- Now that Sen. Barack Obama has denounced his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, many of his critics, especially those who call themselves conservative, are happy he has put the dashiki-wearing, American-criticizing former Marine in his place.

See, these same voices, many that are allegedly Christian, have reacted with glee by calling Wright a prophet of hate and a race baiter.

They hold themselves up to be so concerned about their fellow brother and sister, yet if you looked at their personal lives, I doubt you'd find many with African-American friends and associates (and I doubt their staffs are the most diverse in the world, but that's another story).

But be careful what you ask for.

Now that Wright has set the so-called standard for what isn't acceptable for religious leaders, let's see these same critics take their own kind to task for making absolutely outlandish comments.

But don't stop there. Demand that candidates don't seek counsel from them. Demand that Republican candidates not go to their churches and sit in their pews and accept their contributions. And if elected, make sure those same candidates don't allow them access to the White House or halls of Congress. Turnabout is fair play, and that means guys like the Revs. Pat Robertson and John Hagee should not be sought out for their endorsements, and should be removed from any committees associated with a candidate or a political party.

Oh, I can't wait to get the e-mails from folks who will say, "Yeah, but Obama was a member of the church."

True, very true.

Don't Miss
Martin: How Obama can get beyond Wright
Beck: Obama's odd timing on Wright
Jakes: Negative press distracting churches
Roland Martin archive
But if the marker is now saying anything unacceptable to the masses, then that should be the standard for any pastor: white, black, male, female, conservative or liberal. And any candidate, member or not.

I've read many of the columns and listened to the shows of these so-called conservative patriots, and few, if any, have said a word about conservative white pastors who have called for the overthrow of the government for not following Christian values (the late Francis Schaeffer, a little "g" God on the Religious Right), or who have called for the destruction of the Islamic religion of a number of Americans (Pastor Rod Parsley) and folks worldwide.

Over the weekend, Bill Moyers of PBS; E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post; and Frank Rich of The New York Times have all spoken or written about this double standard that exists in America when it comes to who can speak and about what, and they -- all white men -- were focusing on the leeway white pastors are given.

OK, take race out. Take ideology out. If comments Wright made seven years ago are now a part of the standard, let's see these so-called American-loving conservatives use their radio and TV talk shows, columns and Internet platforms to hold their own accountable for their post-September 11 comments.

Trust me, I won't be holding my breath.

Why? Because conservative religious hate has been deemed a winner at the ballot box. In fact, the more you hate, the better chance you have of getting access to the White House for tea or to be feted by the usual assortment of conservative interest groups. What these conservative media elite do is say, "Oh, poor man. The liberals just don't like you."

For them, Wright's "hate" was a stench. Their "hate" comes up smelling like roses. But to every politician, whether you are a Democrat or a Republican: Beware. The die has been cast. The repeated denunciations of Wright will now lead each and every single one of you to have your pastors' oral and written words examined. If even one thing is said that can be construed as criticizing America or deemed hateful, then expect to see it on YouTube and replayed for millions to see. I suggest you go to your pastor now and say, "Please, watch what you say. I don't want to have to denounce you on national television."

To my media pals who are part of the conservative media elite, we'll be watching. And listening. Let's just see if you're as willing to tear apart one of your own.

Trust me, I won't be holding my breath.

JB HANEBERG1:35PMMay 6th 2008

WHEN SHE GETS HE LYING PANDERING EGO ASS KICKED IN INDIANA AND NORTH CAROLINA TODAY SHE WILL COME TO THE LITTLE BIT OF COMMON SENSE SHE HAS AND DO THE RIGHT THING

kris1:39PMMay 6th 2008

you are kidding me...Hillary is all about politics...you really can't see it??!! she is just like Bush...she will say and do anything to win...WAKE UP!!! and any woman who votes her gender...is just not that intelligent a woman...vote for the right candidate...not by race or gender...

Jackie, NC1:40PMMay 6th 2008

Hopefully we can see the writting on the wall, I have volunteered for Hillary In NC for about a month and we already won!!! cutting his double digit lead to low single digits its a victory. Now we just need to finish him by making the last effort to make sure that all of Hillary supporters make it to the polls.

NC for HILLARY!!!!2008

tzada1:52PMMay 6th 2008

Would be nice.....but I think there is too much support for Obama from the "powers that be" It is all so very strange,arrogant too. There is some reason why they are fixated on that particular man. Anytime other nations, especially hostile nations, back a candidate there is room for concern.

nancy1:53PMMay 6th 2008

FINALLY! Someone with more than half a brain. I agree whole heartedlty. I have been saying this for over 8 months. HILLARY, by far is the best candidate..w/ more expierence than the other two put together. Sure they each have good qualities, but, this women know's her stuff, and all the B.S. that goes on in Washington, she is a fighter, and she has and will kick ass and take names. GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!!1