The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

zelduh — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:47:26 GMT

I THOUGHT TRUTH WAS AN ABSOLUTE DEFENSE. HILLARY IS A MONSTER AND WE ALL KNOW IT. SO, WHERE'S THE BEEF? WHY'D SHE QUIT?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Mr.tutto — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:47:39 GMT

One thing is for sure. Americans have short memories bordering on amnesia. This has become a fight which advantages Hillary because she will throw sand in your eyes and then kick you where it hurts. While I am a Republican and don't like McCain. I am afraid he will win this election because the Democratic party will implode. Why do you think that she is peddling the Clinton-Obama ticket. She is trying to con for votes. If in fact Obama wins ( I don't think that enough people owe him favors )and Washington is all about favors.If it's true that she and Bill had a co-presidency

( I would hold Presidential historians to hold him to that whether she wins or not.

Why would she accept a demotion to vice president ?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jewel1325 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:57:39 GMT

Obama is a fake. He is trying to say that this woman was now an informal adviser! Bull…..If she wasn't central to his campaign policy, why would she even comment on his wishy washy stance about removing troops from Iraq. She herself said that he can't commit to anything. Everything about his campaign is built on political posturing and rhetoric. He got caught on the NAFTA lies and rhetoric when the Canadian press leaked the discussion with his bimbo adviser. They tried to back peddle and say that they weren't sure who it was, and even tried to suggest that it may have been Hillary. It was only due to the fact that CTV, the station that aired the report, had the good sense to investigate it fully and DETERMINED IN FACT THAT IT WAS OBAMA'S ADVISER WHO CALLED HIS POSTURE ON NAFTA MERELY CAMPAIGN RHETORIC AND THEY NEED NOT WORRY! Obama's advisers are as stupid as him!

Open up your eyes people! Obama and his motley crew are the worst of the worst politicians....ala Chicago style.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Mr.tutto — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:01:11 GMT

I am disappointed .... Of all the vile deprecating descriptions that Samantha could have used to describe Hillary, She uses a Sesame Street like description... Monster.... what is she the cookie monster? I would like to think that we are dealing with people who have something called a conscience. How is it that we hear the same things over and over. Soap operas move at a quicker pace.

November is too far off.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Elinor — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:02:36 GMT

"Monster" pretty well sums it up. Samantha Powers is a Pulitzer Prize winning author and a highly respected advocate of human rights. I haven't been able to find the time to deconstruct Hillary's behavior and remarks, but ugly is what comes to mind. Underhanded. Sly. Unscrupulous. Disingenuous. She's exactly the kind of person America does NOT need right now (or ever). Hooray for Dr. Powers. Barack to Hillary: "Beep! Beep!"

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jerryalb — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:06:41 GMT

the real problem with Power's comment is that it's true. not the 'monster' bit, that's merely a nonPC choice of words that she should have known better than, but the rest of her statement about 'Clinton will do/say anything to win' which everyone knows is true she Will do/say anything to win, whether it's true or not. This is not someone we want to be President.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hygieia — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:08:14 GMT

My response to Ms. Powers comment would be: If Hillary Clinton is a monster, then Barack Obama is a monster in messiah's clothing. :-)

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

SaraM — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:09:11 GMT

Perhaps instead of focusing on name calling, journalists such as yourself might want to consider that it was, in fact, the Clinton campaign that told Canada to take their NAFTA renegotiation talks "with a grain of salt" and that it was political posturing.

I refer you to these articles:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/06/738264.aspx

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080306.NAFTA06/TPStory/National

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

stegam5 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:11:31 GMT

Lets face it everyone knows that Hillary Clinton is a monster. Power is only saying what half of the country thinks. So whats wrong in telling the truth. More than what can be said of the Clintons.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

brian.reach — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:11:55 GMT

Ahhhh the Delegate Monster! MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH

GO HILLARY!!!!! BRING IT BACK!!!!!

PS - I like this guy a lot better than that alter jack***

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Take it day by day — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:12:33 GMT

What a childish worker. Clinton is running for President of USA just like Obama.

She has every right to be tough.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

FLRep4Obama — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:12:51 GMT

I am disappointed as well...that the media has suddenly "embraced" HRC, when she is still the same unqualified candidate that she was last week. The scariest thing about Hillary is that she is convinced SHE personally has all the answers. Barack's message is one of unity, of bi-partisanship. There are some very smart people in Washington in both parties - wouldn't it be great to get someone in the White House that can bring them together? All you have to do is look at how HRC tried to get her first health care plan through..secretly going around thoses in her own party that would oppose her and you can see a clear picture our future ....There are many educated FEMALE Republicans who would love to have chance to vote for.......Obama 08.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

luvbears54 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:13:33 GMT

How about what she really is, a lying manipulative conniving ***. Is that too FACTUAL for you, Andrew???

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

R Gravel — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:15:14 GMT

I believe the core problem for the Obama camp is that many of their arguments have become pedantic and contradictory. The last thing I wanted to hear from Senator Obama after losing the popular vote in Ohio, Rhodes Island and Texas was that they were holding the same delegate advantage as before. This after singing a long refrain that Super Delegates should vote with the majority of pledged delegates.

The average democrat, observing the race can’t help but be confused and frustrated by the seeming inconsistencies is the Democratic Party’s “democratic” process. Senator Obama “won” 9 caucus States with a combined vote that was less than Senator Clinton’s winning margin either Ohio or Florida. That’s including Nevada where Clinton drew 51% of the vote but lost. Throw the Texas caucuses into the mix, which apparently uses an applause meter, and we don’t need the help of two campaigns shooting darts to turn the rest of us off.

My hope is that the two campaigns stop talking to the media until they talk to each other and resolve the many problems this nomination process has exposed, including Michigan and Florida so we can have a contest that both sides agree to and support. This needs to happen now.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

yupik1 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:15:52 GMT

It's beyond me why so many people would want a president who's so emotionally erratic like Hillary has clearly shown us on television. Just imagine her standing next to the big red button. I have no doubts she would press it to satisfy her rampant emotional needs. Is this the kind of President we need in this era of instability in the world? I think not.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Take it day by day — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:16:22 GMT

Fact is if Obama wins it you can bet the men and women who have serviced in the Miltary will make sure John Mc Cain wins and there is enough of them to make sure of that.

I would like to see Hillary win but if not then John McCain.

Obama is nothing but another George Bush.

Great personality but no experience.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hoplandria — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:19:22 GMT

Why apologize? I mean Clinton introduced the smear into this campaign. Her campaign keeps the Muslim thing alive. Maybe it wasn't politically correct to call Clinton a monster, but this loyal democrat would rather see Presdient McCain in the White House than Clinton. I don't like her. I think she's racist. I think she will do or say anything to get elected...anything. Even destroying her support among African Americans. Sounds like a monster to me.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

lostinpaloalto — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:19:23 GMT

Of course Powers should resign! Calling Hillary a monster is an serious affront to monsters everywhere!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

05corvettelady — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:19:59 GMT

I'm afraid she was telling the truth. Hillary Clinton is a Monster. She will do anything to get elected and I mean by lying, cheating, bribing, you name it, she will do anything. She is a nasty, vile woman and a Monster!! There I said it!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

NewsWkDickG — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:20:13 GMT

All of the candidates are and are going to become even more aggressive in attacking each other’s credentials. The funny thing is that when you discount time on the job without meaningful results as being simply of minimal importance, then not one of them has a whole lot to brag about. Maybe that is why they aggressively attack their opponents’ records and only make abstract and questionable references to their own credits. We also are now going to see a lot of nonsense, ‘Swift boat’ style, with well funded, pseudo-independent 501/527 groups attempting to coerce public opinion for/against individual candidates and the only truth you can know for sure about them is that they are totally biased and lack any conscience. Then the candidates themselves have said and will continue to say a lot about what they will/won’t do, what their opponents will/won’t do and what that means to particular groups of voters, all without any factual checks being available until after the fact. Everything, all of this, is being aimed at literally manipulating public opinion and creating voters’ loyalty. It would seem that possibly the best we can do is close our eyes and ears to all of the smoke-screens and maybe just throw a dart at a list to make our selection.

That doesn’t seem very realistic and from the recent past we can vividly see the real problem with allowing the manipulation to occur, so what can we do? Personally I agree with the majority of voters in that we need significant change, change from the current direction and change from politics as usual, to see our representatives become honestly and conscientiously focused on real benefit for the average American and not just for Special Interests who then return benefit to the policy makers. How can we confidently see through all of the deception and subterfuge mentioned to influence that to happen? As I see it there is actually only one way and that is to be disciplined to put our own biases aside, to thereby avoid being manipulated and to then objectively determine who we think really has the character to do the job. Who actually has the required honesty, integrity, compassion, strength and humility (yes humility, which is required and important to not alienate and rather to encourage needed cooperation)? If we each can have the conviction to do that, to be factually objective in our choice, then I think the result will benefit America.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

pmcs — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:20:15 GMT

Romano, answer me. So, Prof.Power called Hillary "a monster". Are you saying she is not a monster?? After all she did to destroy her opponent and destroy the Democratic party, she is not?? All she did over this past several weeks was to make Limbaugh, Bush, Cheney and McCain happy. Romano, so she is still not a "monster"?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

itruth — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:20:40 GMT

What puzzles me about the above post is that Clinton's supporters are criticized for referring to Obama supporters as cultish, but the author can't come up with one example of the dehumanizing comments across the internet repeated by Obama supporters against Clinton. I've long found it frightening to even scan most of the message boards at news and opinion sites, and most people I know who venture out there (including Obama supporters) readily acknowledge that the most loathsome attacks, usually sexist and misogynist, are from Obama supporters targeting Clinton. They were out in droves recently to defend David Shuster's use of the word pimp in regard to Chelsea Clinton. They seemed to unanimously believe that members of the media had the absolute right to trash Hillary Clinton and her family at will. Today, I'm shocked once again to discover that Obama's online supporters earnestly believe that Samantha Powers was in the right to refer to Hillary Clinton as a "monster." (If you don't believe me, check the comments on this board.)

But at the same time, the Obama supporters twist and distort every word anyone in the Clinton campaign speaks in order to play the race/religion card yet again in some bizarre, baseless accusation.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

sueadams — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:20:47 GMT

Excuse me, but the Clinton's camps tactics and tones are more than offensive and insulting. They are baiting Obama at every turn and clearly will stop at nothing short of scorched earth to win.

There are a myriad of comments Obama and company could make about Hillary, starting with a simple statement of fact: A woman who chooses to stay married to a man who has publicly humiliated her for years clearly has some judgement issues that might well prevent her from making decisions in the best interests of the people of the United States -- at 3:00 a.m. or any other time!

This woman is NOT entitled to the nomination because of her political loyality to the former president nor is she entitled to claim "political experience" for little more than "martial experience." She is as divisive as a candidate as she would be president and this country can not afford her.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

RASM5602 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:22:20 GMT

Hillary is a "MONSTER".? Yes , she is a MOnster..100% monster. This monster wants to be PRESIDENT....Bush is a monster, and so is Karl Rove, Scarborough, Oreilly. Linbaugh are all monsters.But the biggest MONSTER of them all is SHAWN HANNITY of fox news. Hillary the monster for PRES. Power is a mentally disturbed person.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

cees14 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:23:00 GMT

wow..one thing i have to say is, Andrew Romano is either a clear repub or a Clinton supporter. All ur articles are extremely bias. Well on a differnt note, here what i say about this. Both McCain and Obama camps came out and apologized for remarks their supporters made. showing dignity and good character. Clinton camp where are the apologies for the Ken Starr comment? and of course the rest of the dirty comments u guys have been throwing at EVERYONE. Hillary is not a monster by any means. but she is an emotional wreck. we all know that and have seen that. different Hillary on different days. look at McCain and Obama, cool, calm and collected. I am a life long dem. and sad to say i prefer McCain over Hillary.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

pmcs — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:24:45 GMT

Is Romano arguing that Hillary is not a monster? What's this young boy trying to say?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

pmcs — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:26:28 GMT

Obviously, Romano is a Hillary supporter.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

an obama girl — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:27:38 GMT

Now if Obama's campaign would have called her and Bill druggies that don't inhale that might be news.

The press try to make it out that Obamas change message means he must not fight back. That he must follow Hillary's idea that Hope means to do nothing. BULL! Change is not and will not be easy. Obama's biggest hurtle is members of the democratic that are just like Hillary and like things just the way they are.

Hillary's behavior has been unforgivable! Apparently she is a Clinton and is expected to steal, lie roll around in the dirt but Obama must not! It would ruin his image!

His image is not why people are voting for him. They are looking for THEIR government back!

Hillary continues to look like a republician! She may as well have a (R) in front of her name!

She is NO different than George Bush and Dick Chaney! Hillary and Dick Chaney the true Darth Vadars of our Government!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

rpresley — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:28:24 GMT

The real problem is the need to get dirty to fight politicians who will resort to anything to stay at the public troft and hold onto their power.

Additionally the media is more concerned with attention grabbing headlines than the facts or the relevance of alot of what is reported. If the people had time to really dig into, or were actually provided the facts by the media, dirty politics wouldn't work.

And finally, where there is a Clinton, there is a scandel. Hard to be a direct contender against a Clinton and not get dragged into dirty politics, if you want beat their 25 year establishment honed to stay at the public feeding troft.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

sick of clintons — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:29:00 GMT

I used to be a Clinton supporter but after reading this article my eyes have opened and all the mudslinging and putting media into full swing whom she is control of, it's shameful. I will definitely vote for Obama, because he is trustworthy, our hopeful future and knows how do get things done.

after reading this article and her scandals, the tides are turning against her. Let the cat out of the bag!!

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2007/06/hillary-clinton-and-largest-election.html

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

True Democrat — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:29:23 GMT

Why wouldn't you want a MONSTER that WILL do anything to win running the country with the other MONSTER named BILL if it's the good of all mankind and KEEP US SAFE. Better than a snake oil salsman that says...First of all, "I WILL MAKE CHANGE AND WE WILL DO IT TOGETHER AMERICA" any F**K'in MORON THAT PREACHES THESE EMPTY WORDS WITHOUT TELLING YOU HOW HE'S GOING TO DO THIS IS A B.S.er, LIKE A HEAL ALL ELIXIR SALESMAN BACK IN THE DAY any F**K'in MORON THAT VOTES FOR A GUY LIKE THIS, MOST LIKELY VOTED FOR BUSHWHACKER ! and look what you ended up with after listening to Bush's B.S. GREAT JOB GULLIBLE AMERICANS ! Hey Fools, There's a war in Kenya going on forever, and the first thing Oboma will do is send troops over there to stick our nose in somebody else's business again to try to solve somebody else's problems because his father has ties there. He's like a preschooler in politics "Knows Nothing" about running a country, and "Knows Nothing" about the other worlds leaders, he's never met with them, he only knows just about what you know "NOTHING" So why don't you run for President? The Hillary / Bill team already ran the country, well think about how much better the country was economically. Oboma has 1 year in the senate of total politics, and for the Kennedy's to endorse him is no big deal, Royalty? Come on a drunken mistress killing (ok he let her drown) thinks he runs the world, "Lame Ted"? endorses him, is a national joke. All the good Kennedy's are deceased and we're left with the wannabe's. The media reports all the facts? "There a Joke Too". Oboma started the badmouthing about Hillary, so Bill and Hillary retaliated, to defend them selves, same thing as if you hit me. I'll hit you harder. bigger, better, otherwise don't start and the cry about it for the sympathy from the mental midgets to come to your aid. and it's not about race? "B.S". Oprah is putting allot of her egg$ in one basket. You voted for Bush too didn't you? "Your Votes Are Our Future" Hey Country you did a great job with voting Bush in and then voting him in again? Go ahead and use your some more common sense and play with your new Obama toy, that may be hazardous to our future. Take the chance if you have nothing to lose, Haven't you lost enough?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

llgarrity — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:32:25 GMT

I would check your facts on whose campaign said those comments to the Canadian representative. In fact, as has been reported in the Canadian press yesterday, it was in fact, a member of Clinton's campaign who downplayed her NAFTA stance. So much for Obama's campaign "saying one thing and doing another" Hillary.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

an obama girl — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:32:44 GMT

All Obama supporters.....

Stand up and make it known!

1. I question Hillary's loyalty to the democratic part.

2. I will not accept Hillary on a ticket with Obama.

3. Clinton stands for a ugly time in American politics.

4. I vote Mccain before Clinton.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

vanya — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:38:43 GMT

I believe it was the foreign press that first described the Obama followers as "cult-like".

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Skulldugger7 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:39:53 GMT

Indicative of the democratic party leadership is this: we have a key democratic party operative who has often stated admiration for a candidate they then call 'monster'. Our liberal brothers and sisters are more lip-savvy than heart-savvy, it seems.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Pandora1 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:40:00 GMT

Ms. Power's comment has merely highlighted a trend of Obama's campaign in general, and Senator Obama himself in particular saying and doing one thing in public and saying and doing another thing in private. It is reminiscent of his smarmy remarks about Senator Clinton's "likeability" in earlier debates (with his back to her, "Oh, you're likeaable enough Hillary") his top advisor contacting the Canadian Ambassador and back-tracking on his NAFTA position (does anyone really think that such an astute politician as Senator Obama would let a loose cannon out on his own to speak for him without his knowledge?) and his indignation at being questioned by the press (walking out without answering more questions) when they (rightly) wanted to hear more about Senator Obama's connection with Tony Rezko (he helped Obama buy his house at $300,000 less than its listed price, then bought the lot next to the house and put it into his wife's name, which Senator Obama now enjoys) ad nauseum.....

Why doesn't Newsweek and the other pundits see his own duplicity and vaunted "transparency" in government for what it is. No, he is not a "monster," but neither is Senator Clinton. Let's play on a level playing field -- even if it is deemed "negative," as long as it is out in the open, like Senator Clinton's questioning of his experience (fair game in politics for time immemorial, for Heaven's sake) etc. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the campaign kitchen, but don't send your minions out to do your dirty work, or make veiled, but unmistakable comments pf disdain

regarding your viable opponent.

Over 60 and overeducated (sorry pundits) woman

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Atticus — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:40:17 GMT

No question, it was a very poor choice of words by a very intelligent woman. It is not that they are truthful words, but that they give the Clinton Machine another opportunity to put the heat on Obama so their own candidtate can escape the heat. Mrs. Clinton's pompous attitude of entitlement is written all over in her words and body language. It is also evidenced by the large cadre of similarly situated women of a certain age who form her base. Quoted in another MSMBC article: "Nancy Patterson, a 54-year-old communications technician from San Antonio, had taken a week's vacation to volunteer for Clinton. "I like Obama, but he needs to wait his turn," she said. What?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

an obama girl — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:41:32 GMT

Hillary is DREAMING!!! Obama will NEVER accept her as a running mate. She is the challenge in changing american politics.

The democratic leader of this party are doing what they do best.....NOTHING.

They will sit back and watch the house burn rather that stop this bull Hillary is trying to pull.

Democrats.....their refusal to act when they KNOW HIllary can not win confirms they will not act on Obamas side in Auguest.

They are waiting for Hillary to find a reason to keep party politics just as they are.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

nebajnim — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:41:43 GMT

What makes me depressed, is that Hillary can only win with the help of superdelagates. If this happened she would be bypassing the will of the people, and be just like George Bush Jr. using the conservative Supreme Court to subvert the will of the people to get "elected."

Another problem I have is with the media, and its rolling over when Hillary challenged them to treat her and Obama equally. OK: how about not including the superdelagates at all in the count? It is obvoius that they can still switch theri votes, so they sould be on the whole ignored until the convention. And how about calling the Tuesday results fairly? She insists on calling this a comeback when she has a net gain of less than 12 delagates.

Also True Democrat: Go and listen to any stump speach and try to find solid policy. It is impossible. In this day and age you have to do a bit of research to find a candidate's policy. Here is the shocker: Obama has policy ideas. Hillary is preaching change too. Time to take off the blinders. And besides, if it is Bill you want in the white house, that would be against the constitution, he has already been elected twice. (I don't beleive I just responded to someone who uses all caps.)

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

ericrsiny — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:41:46 GMT

Obama supporters stating that they would vote McCain before Hillary would just make them (and him) look worse and look like this race was more about HIM winning then the Democratic Party winning. It would be counterproductive and would back fire badly.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

divad — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:42:19 GMT

20 years of the Bush/Clinton Dynasty is enough. I can't even imagine adding 4 (or heaven forbid 8) more years to the total. Can you imagine this country be run by two families for 28 years. Is this a Democracy or a Dictatorship?

If I can't vote for Obama in the general, I'm voting McCain.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

joeldm — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:42:21 GMT

I've been reading the comments after articles like this since day 1 and the real angry, nasty, dehumanizing posts almost universally come from the Obama side. They call Hillary every name in the book, insult President Clinton and even go after Chelsea. It's sickening. Some "new way".

It comes from being True Believers. True Believers are the most dangerous kind of political supporter. Because they almost religiously believe their candidate is right in all instances about everything and their opponents are evil incarnate, so it makes any kind of comment or behavior OK. Can we call Hillary a Monster, a "B", evil, Dick Cheney, Hitler? "Yes we can!"

When the dust clears, these people will not support Hillary, but Hillary supporters WILL support Obama if he's the nominee. Obama-people need to take a long look in the mirror and ask themselves if their "coming to Obama story" really justifies this kind of behavior.

These are the sort of people you look to if you're looking to create a cult which is why Clinton supporters sometimes refer to Obamanites as "cultists". It takes all of two minutes reading Obama-supporter comments to realize that these are people who would do or say anything to get their guy elected and that is just plain scary.

JoeL

Atlanta, GA

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

blundellbill — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:42:51 GMT

Clinton is a very power hungry, arrogant, and pompus politician that makes me want to remove myself from the political process.. It seems she will do anything to win the White House. She seems very comfortable surrounding herself those who lack integrity. She truly is a dead give away when it comes to showing her true colors. We need Obama now to bring this country together. He truly is a leader that inspires. He is bringing out the best in others. While I don't condone the "Monster "comment it seems to strike a cord with many who see through years of Clinton's power hungry agenda.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jackjack — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:44:25 GMT

1. I have phone banked for Obama. I will not for HRC.

2. I have donated more than $500 to Obama. I will not give that to the DNC for an HRC campaign

3. I stood in line, the rain for six hours to see M. Obama @ a rally at UCLA. I will not lift a finger to support an "HRC" anything.

4. I will not accept HRC on the ticket with Obama.

5. HRC is disloyal. She will try to hand the presidency to McCain if she cant have it.

6. I voted for Clinton every time in the past.

7. I never will again.

7. I am an evangelical independent

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

an obama girl — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:44:27 GMT

Why are there so many uneducated people on NAFTAGATE?

Do they not read?

Newsweek. Will you PLEASE PRINT YESTERDAYS CANADIAN PRESS COVERAGE ON THE REAL TRAITER?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

nebajnim — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:44:45 GMT

joeldm must have missed the True Democrat's post

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

an obama girl — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:45:31 GMT

Joel

You are not supposed to enhale ...remember?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

skibummin — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:45:51 GMT

Its about time the good old dem party got backed to down and dirty cigar smokin back room politics like good ole Rosevelt,Truman and yes babies JFK

Non of this birkensHtock huggy bs thats how we lose give the monster

Hillay got get em

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

cece.borjeson — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:46:57 GMT

Infrahumanization: now it has a name. It's the same condition that turns basically nice people into crazies when they're encased, anonymously, in their cars. It would be a fine world if everyone simultaneously realized that we're all on the same team... with the same goals ... just different ideas on how to get there. It would be great to see more civility in web posts AND on the road.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Fastball2K — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:47:14 GMT

Let me see here.

Powers makes a smear remark as if it were her own personal feelings, to the dirt-loving British press of all people, and Obama gets to keep his hands clean through it all.

Hey now that sounds pretty convenient, a little too convenient.

Coincidentally, it all happens right after Clinton upsets Obama's winning streak. Now that's great timing for Obama. Yeah, surely a coincidence..

Wake up folks.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

dsaint — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:47:30 GMT

H.R.C has blown it for the Democrats, by playing the Me or nothing game. Sad woman she gave up her pride for this election, by making a deal with the devil (Bill). Monster! please give monsters a little credit.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

habes56@hotmail.com — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:47:38 GMT

Hello ya'll

Can I just mention to you that we need look no further than the comments posted on this article to prove the exact point that Mr. Romano raises in the article. Use your brains, not your emotions....you're picking a President!!!!!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

blundellbill — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:47:50 GMT

How pompus is it for Clinton to even think that Obama would be on her ticket. She's assuming that she will be the next president. There she goes again with that arrogant thinking. Has she forgotten that the race is still on? Or does she just love her self-proclaimation and bask in her self-importance? She is so very arrogant and cunning.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

CoffeeeCandy — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:50:07 GMT

jewel1325 you just have to blame Obama for what this advisor said. He has control of her mouth at all times. But it's all his fault and hes fake.. My My .. What about the things HRC staff has said about the Obama team. Clinton introduced the smear or have we forgotten again ?? How is it whats good for the goose is not always good for the gander. I read this mess the HRC supporters state and you sound like you have completely lost your minds. Are you really reading about your HRC? She is Scared ,, yes scared and will do ANYTHING at this point ..Humm Why did she ask this *BAD MAN* to join her ?? DO you have an answer to that HRC Supporters. If Obama is soooooooo FAKE and Terrible why did she hint to be a team with him and go against Mc Cain Andrew Romano needs to re group on his articla

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Native New Yorker — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:50:13 GMT

The truth hurts....she is a MONSTER! And, a vindictive one at that. Why can Billary sling all the insults and play dirty, yet not get penalized? Who said politics was fair.

I just want all of this over, it is divisive, scorched earth politics at its worth. The Democrats deserve to lose big time in November.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Skulldugger7 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:50:49 GMT

Divisive and self-destructing politicians like Obama (and soon to be Hillary) are all that the democratic party has lately (O Al Gore, where are ye when we need ye?). You don't see this on the republican side. And with Nader as icing on the cake, McCain will be elected in November, because the majority of Americans are tired of Obama's half-truths and Hillary's lies.

Gore in 12!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

zzxno — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:51:27 GMT

So, when you are finally going to stop attributing the NAFTA gaffe to senator Obama? There is more than ample evidence at this point that the memo's in question were false and that it was most likely the Clinton camp that made the contact in question. Perpetrating the lie here is harmful in two ways, first it distracts from the fact that Obama's campaign did not misrepresent itself and second it distracts from the fact that Hillary Clinton not only misrepresented herself to voters but then lied through her teeth about it to smear her opponent. I swear, one SNL skit and some carefully planned whining and the whole media has decided to give the Clinton campaign a pass.

Lets see some reporting on the Peter Paul case and some retractions on the NAFTA comments and lets see them now!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jackjack — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:52:11 GMT

Clinton is trying to throw the election so that McCain can get his one term and she can run in '12. She knows she cant win.

Cant you HRC Supporters see that? She'd rather throw the Party under the bus than lose.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:53:46 GMT

An Obama girl: "She is NO different than George Bush and Dick Chaney! Hillary and Dick Chaney the true Darth Vadars of our Government!!"

pmcs: "Romano, answer me. So, Prof.Power called Hillary "a monster". Are you saying she is not a monster?? After all she did to destroy her opponent and destroy the Democratic party, she is not??"

05corvettelady: "(Sen. Clinton) is a nasty, vile woman and a Monster!! There I said it!!"

lostinpaloalto: "Calling Hillary a monster is an serious affront to monsters everywhere!"

luvbears54: "How about what she really is, a lying manipulative conniving ***."

zelduh: "I THOUGHT TRUTH WAS AN ABSOLUTE DEFENSE. HILLARY IS A MONSTER AND WE ALL KNOW IT."

After that selection, one question comes to mind:

DID YOU PEOPLE EVEN BOTHER TO READ THE ARTICLE?

In the past two weeks, I've seen Clinton peple bask Romano as a tool of the Obama campaign. I've seen Obama people bash him as a tool of the Clinton campaign, The fact is, he's a blogger with no particular agenda other than to point out items of interest that happen, that we might want to pay attention to.

The MAJORITY of the article dealt with the fact that what is being said on BOTH SIDES of the postings online has descended to a level beyond ridiculous to the downright scary at moments. You folks seem to feel dehumanizing folks is perfect legitimate.

While I appreciate the passion on both sides here, the fact is that I cannot support a candidate whose supporters are willing to use such vitriol.

At this point, I find I sincerely hopg that this thing drags out to the convention, goes through a half-dozen ballots and in the end ensures the loss of the Democrats candidate in the fall. From all of your behavior, it is obvious that if these candidates attract folks like those cited, people who believe that anyone who disagrees with them deserves to be treated in public like the above comments, then neither one is worthy or qualified to lead our country.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

vogtcha — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:54:40 GMT

This is getting ridiculous.

It is obvious that most of the people posting here have lost perspective.

Both Hilary and Barrack are excellent candidates that we as Democrats should be proud of.

They have both said openly that they agree with each other on most issues in principal.

I weep when some so called "Democrats" say that they will rather vote Republican (McCain) than Hilary or Barrack if either one or the other wins. Think about it please! If we all reacted the same, then I assure you it wouldnt matter if Hilary or Barrack won the election, as they woudlnt stand a chance against McCain.

Please my fellow democrats, let us not lose perspective of what is important here.

Obviously the race is very tight and as such very heated...but we are still part of the same family.

If we forget that, and start calling each other names, it will be hard for us to keep our perspective when we get to the real race in Nov. And that my friends is the real price we all should be fighting for!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

missykender — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:57:25 GMT

Out of a job

And Hill's to blame

She gives monsters

a bad name.

(insert Bon Jovi guitar solo here)

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

News and Notes — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:57:57 GMT

Hillary is not going negative, she is drawing contrasts. She is tough, but that is what we need in the White House. If Obama thinks Hillary is hard on him, wait until the Republican/ McCain mean machine lets loose. Let's just pause, calm down, and watch the race unfold. They are both sensational candidates so let's keep it civil. It is one of the most exciting Democratic primary seasons i nhistory.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Jack and Jill — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:59:04 GMT

Please catch up, it was Clinton's camp who spoke to Canada. IT's been in the news, aren't you a reporter?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

clarity5 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 21:59:11 GMT

So...are we saying that she's not a monster?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

News and Notes — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:00:01 GMT

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

News and Notes — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:00:03 GMT

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Skulldugger7 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:00:24 GMT

After Obama's actions, there is NO WAY I am voting for that lying, cheating, divisive, real-estate company shill! I will vote for Hillary, or McCain. And if neither of them is in running, I'll vote for whichever elephant the reublicans put in front of me. And you all should, too!!!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Texas T-sip — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:01:14 GMT

This is not about the party, or how many Dems can win in November - this is and always has been about HRC winning - their "kitchen sink" strategy was always there waiting in the wings for us to first see the crying game and feel sympathy then use on Obama or anyone else that would have reached this far. And now one day an HRC advisor calls Obama, a Ken Starr, and the next day an Obama staffer calls HRC "a Monster" -- well Obama looks nothing like Starr nor does he act like a Starr - But the Monster comment- the truth shall set you free!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hallihunt — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:01:54 GMT

Maybe I've been through too many mudslinging elections, but I still agree with the old saying "if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen". And Andrew, yes, Clinton bloggers do use the word cultish when describing Obama supporters, but as a Clinton supporter, I've been called much, much worse - and most of it is aimed at my age, my gender and my intellect (all of which I am quite proud of, by the way). The often emotion responses, even to fact based comments, remind me of the playground bullies who's parents didn't care what mischief they got up to. In this case, they feel that the internet shield gives them permission to spew some of the most amazingly ignorant and unprovoked commentary I've heard since the last election. I think the fact that we older voters find it amusing only adds fuel to the ire of the youthful voice. I try to look on the bright side, at least they are involved.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

just jerry — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:02:43 GMT

The people within campaigns often have more passion about and greater disrespect for the opposing politician than the candidates themselves. They can't be allowed into the position of speaking for the campaign or the candidate. Journalists love this sort of thing and make a great deal of it and the candidates get drawn into it and it escalates.

It would be good for the Clinton and Obama to issue a joint statement that enough is enough. Both candidates have been equally unfiar to each other. You only have to actually listen to and understand what each side is saying to know the turth of the equality of the unfairness.

I know everyone will disagree and say their candidate is being treated more unfairly. You don't have the objectivity to actually listen to each other. Just Jerry

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jackjack — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:03:06 GMT

vogtcha:

Someone should have told that to HRC. We were all part of the same family until HRC started and continues to THIS DAY to tear down her DEMOCRATIC OPPONENT while she PRAISES MCCAIN.

Perspective in November..you're absolutely right. If HRC was 'keeping things in perspective' she would have dropped out before going this low. She's trying to bankrupt the PARTY by keeping this going. We'll spend another 120M to fight through Puerto Rico and the end result is what....she still loses.

I used to love the Clintons. Then they surprised me. Then they p'***ed me off. Then they disgusted me. Now I outright loathe them. I dont have to vote Republican. I can and WILL, just stay HOME if she steals the election.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

mgred — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:04:39 GMT

I'm a 46 year old business owner in Southern CA and a lifelong Dem. Let me echo previous posters: It's time for a change. The Clintons had their 8 years and she does NOT represent a change. If she wins the nomination, McCain has my vote. He'll get many more from folks like me. He'll also benefit greatly from the countless thousands (mostly young) who simply won't vote. Thats what bothers me most of all.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

News and Notes — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:04:40 GMT

Its about HRC winning because like her or not, she would be one of the best presidents in history

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

nebajnim — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:04:56 GMT

Hey: By the way, up here in Ohio, I personally know at least 3 people who voted for HC because she would be the weaker opponent for Mccain. If you go into the hills, you will also find a pretty solid contingent of people who think the muslim rumors are true. So you Hillary people should think about reality and November when you talk about the "greater good" of the Democratic Party.

On the same page, but the other side, I would hope that Obama has the ability to swallow his pride if Hillary did get the nomination and wanted him to be #2. It would at the least catapult him to the top of the Senate, where he would be more able to induce change that a rookie from Illinois. And change is drastically needed. I worked on his campaign here in Ohio, and the guy in charge of his local office said he would accept that spot. I am of the opinion that it would be better for Democrats if he did accept it, as the Democrats would not be able to win with a "Hillary/Somebody Else" ticket.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Just Ohio — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:04:58 GMT

A WOMAN calling another WOMAN 'A MONSTER' then It was a WOMAN who reported it...Doesn't that hit the Clinton's Camp. She doesn't want WOMEN to focus on that very, very negative thought. So, the new spin is she and OBAMA on a ticket again. But, the press aren't buying it. They like the 'MONSTER TITLE'. That focus thanks, to the media is to get the Women THINKING about Hilary... GO ROMANO 08.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

mamanina8 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:05:01 GMT

Please tell Hillary to 'get off it'. She's so 'shocked' at a comment that seems to be more becoming to her as this campaign goes in the wrong direction. She's a fighter alright, she's a dirty fighter and not a classy lady. She crys, she whines, now she's shocked. Really! There's no stopping the dirt she can pull. Unfortunately, this is leaving McCain to look so good, he doesn't have to do much but cross his arms and just let the Dems duke it out.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Shap — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:05:29 GMT

Vogtcha, you're right. If you vote for McCain in November, we will get more Sam Alito/Antonin Scalia/Clarence Thomas kind of justices on the Supreme Court. McCain has already said that he will appoint strict constructionists in the Alito/Scalia/Thomas mode, so, let's go Democrats, get it together

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jinny345 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:06:21 GMT

Romano, your job is to follow the campaign and yet you're not up to date with the facts. That Goolsbee quote you ignorantly flaunt as his own words are NOT HIS OWN WORDS. Several stories have come out saying that the quote in the memo were not Goolsbee's words, but the Canadian Embassy's INTERPRETATION of his words. I think it's rediculous that it now comes out that it was the Clinton campaign who actively contacted the Canadians to give them the wink and nod and NOT the Obama campaign...yet this is how the public sees the story happening. It's like 1984 and we allow the Clintons to get away with their dishonest tactics. Unbelievable.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:06:56 GMT

How does a turd run a campaign? By hiring incompetent advisors and toadies who don;t know when or how to keep their mouths shut. One can only imagine with horror what hell would let loose should this foolish and inept vapid candidate actually get elected. Npt only has he no viable experience, he shows a complete lack of discernment in positioning his campaign with handpicked inepts as well. Angels and ministers of grace protect us from an Obama presidency-- a fool in charge, surrounded by morons, can only lead this country down the primrose path to destruction.

If we don' let five year olds drink or drive, why on earth would we let one run the nation? I t is clear that this toddler needs to grow up a lot more before he considers trying to run for the most important office in the world. I am a lifelong, leftist and, should this ass be the nominee, I will vote for McCain since at least you know waht you are getting and where he stands. Obama is a cipher with no judgment--in spite of his claims to the contrary. And his unfortuante choices for his campaign leaders make this painfully clear,

Go back to Illinois, young man, and try learning to walk before you run.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Fastball2K — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:08:11 GMT

Vote with your brains people, not with your emotions.

This country needs to be fixed, and it needs a president that can fix it.

This is not a WWE match and it's not about who can punch harder.

Big talkers don't equal big results, learn from the mistakes this country made with the Bush administration.

Quit being a sheep of the media and use your heads, otherwise we'll end up in the same lousy situation that we've been in for the past 8 years.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Skulldugger7 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:08:15 GMT

just jerry - it IS important to hear (and publish) the rants and attitudes of the 'people within a campaign'. These people are a DIRECT reflection of the candidate his/herself. You can't merely laugh it off as 'passion'. Would you direct the same defense against the supporters of the KKK, or the Taliban? Gore in '12.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

a brighter America 08 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:08:19 GMT

OH, I see it clearly! Hillary, Bill, her campaign aides, cochairs, managers, and supports can say anything deragatory and mean-spirited they wish against Mr. Obama and it is okay??? But let someone from Obama's camp call Hillary a "monster" and it's not okay? This is, indeed, double standards being played by Hillary and her campaign. Mr. Obama's campaign asks questions as to why Hillary has not released her tax records, a lelgitimate question, and what does the Clinton campaign do? They compare him to Ken Starr! Yes, Hillary is the ONLY one who is AUTHORIZED to levy attacks on her oponent. Her theory seems to be: "I can say anything about you and throw lies, distortions, and the kitchen sink at you, Obama, but don't you dare ask questions about my not releasing my taxes, and don't you dare say anything negative about me!!"

Isn't this some kind of sick thinking on her part? Oh, I guess I haven't picked up on Hillary's self-sense of PERFECTION, ENTITLEMENT, AND I AM THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN BE PRESIDENT, ME AND ONLY ME, SEE HOW GREAT I AM. I LIKE TO FIGHT, I WILL FIGHT, I AM A FIGHTER."

I think those superdelegates need to migrate to Mr. Obama's corner, he is the ONLY rational candidate and he is ahead in all aspects of the competition! That is unless they want Hillary fighting them tooth and nail if she doesn't get her way! That is, IF she undermines the votes of the people with her slash-and-burn tactics. Come on, superdelegates, YOU can end all of Hillary's madness! Please support and endorse a man of integrity, honesty, and, yes, an exceptionally superior legislator! America is counting on you to DO THE RIGHT THING!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jackjack — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:08:27 GMT

"I try to look on the bright side, at least they are involved."

Well dont get too attached. If HRC steals the election the youth are not going to vote for her and all the 'suddenly inspired' voters who account for the huge turnout are NOT going to turn out for her.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

LindsayCarlson — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:09:36 GMT

Actually, Hillary IS a monster. She's also a LESBIAN. You can google this.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

just jerry — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:09:49 GMT

I know everyone will disagree and say their candidate is being treated more unfairly. You don't have the objectivity to actually listen to each other. Just Jerry

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

placidgirl7 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:10:50 GMT

Here we are - more nasty name calling of Hillary Clinton - she has not lied about Obama, he has lied about her - I heard some of his speeches in which he deliberately lied about Hillary's positions, and printed those brochures with deliberate lies about her.....if she responds, or calls him on something - telling the TRUTH! - he responds by saying "the Clintons are picking on me". She is the best qualified candidate, if people would stop idealizing him with google eyes, and pay attention to what she is saying they would realize she knows what she is talking about, and he does NOT - and it wasn't about what he said about NAFTA - which was parroting Hillary only taking it further - it was the fact that he was taling Canadians something different than what he said in public....and he got caught. So don't say Hillary did something bad or wrong....she is no monster, and you nasty people need to stop this ugliness. I'd like to know how many of you are supposed to be evangelical Christians.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

15R8 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:11:14 GMT

We are Hillsters hear us roar.

I CAN SEE FROM HERE OBAMAS BEEN CAUGHT IN THE NET OF NOT BEING POSITIVE I BET!

Just a little bit of critical review and a little truth from you

Bucanan knows what many of us will do if the Hillster does not win &its you.

WE WIL VOTE FOR MC CAIN INSTEAD OF YOU !!

thats what we will do cause we aint gonna vote for you You would sell out the citizens thats what you would do .Give driverslicences to illegals too. so we aint gonna vote for you.

WHY DONT YOU JUST QUIT LIKE YOU WANTED THE HILLSTER TO DO !before she beat you!!!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jackjack — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:13:33 GMT

@smarternu

nice try. HRC's people stay fighting each other.

She changed her slogan about 8X

Her top two campaign people quit.

Ickes and Penn are blaming each other

She burned through 120M on Iowa buying sandwiches...

and this is her handpicked EXPERIENCED cabinet..yeah RIGHT.

Obama's campaign has been run phenomenally.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Skulldugger7 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:13:54 GMT

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

grammagram — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:14:37 GMT

So what's the big deal? Hillary and Bill have not minced words and name calling. They first moved this process to a low low level. There is just no honesty or integrity with this team.

If Hill/Bill steel this election through their well-seasoned use of trickery and pressure to count FL and MI it will certainly make my vote choice easier. John McCain will suddenly look a lot better. Hillary with her sleezy husband are SHAMELESS. As deceptive and dishonest as the Clinton's are, why would this nation benefit from their return to the White House. Great example is the NAFTA/Canada which cannot even qualify as

spin! It was blatently dishonest and Ohio and TX fell for it! I hope when the general election comes around her name is not on the ticket, unless of course she chooses to leave it on despite DNC rules!

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/usa/2008/03/clintons_role_in_naftagate.html

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:15:19 GMT

Hillary whine? Get your head examined. Barack is a huge whiny baby. If he had to run against a Republican in a race, he would pee himself. If anyone challenges him, he cries, "You are being negative! You are being MEAN to me!!" What a spoiled brat. He thought the 3am phone ad was negative> Listen, jerk--this is a campaign. ANYONE who runs against you is basically saying I am a better choice, What this whiny baby man wants is to be CHOSEN, not elected. He can't stand anyone making a comparison because, in any comparison, he falls short. I am so sick of his smug little I am the savior campaign rhetoric. The fools reminds me of that weirdest period in Michael Jackson's life when he was spouting off about saving the little children. I am surprised he doesn't have a campaign slogan that reads: suffer the little voters to come unto me . . .

If you to make a list of want crybaby whiners, I think Obama should takes positions numbers 1-5. GO home, Obama and grow up before you try to enter a political race. It isn't a junior high class election, though that might be something you are more suited to. "And I promise softer toilet tissues for all those asses who support me!'

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

cutechick01 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:15:36 GMT

Romano - My first time reading your blog, but I would say that was very well written and I agree, My very good friend is a PASSIONATE Obama supporter and when she refers to Clinton or McCain supporters she really lets them have it to include the "how could they be so stupid to vote, blah blah blah...". But, when she is with me and my family, it turns into a completely rational discussion about both Democratic candidates and their respective abilitites to be successful. We're both in our early 30's. All the more fun, she's white, degreed, and pretty darn liberal...me I'm a black woman, also degreed and more moderate. We've both cast our votes here in Texas, she for Obama, me for Clinton. Rock on democracy!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

a brighter America 08 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:16:21 GMT

Posted By: smarternu (March 7, 2008 at 5:06 PM)

Go back to Illinois, young man, and try learning to walk before you run.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hey, big mouth, what the heck do you think Hillary, Bill, their campaign aides, cochairs, and managers, their supporters and endorsers have been doing? They have not run a campaign of slash-and-burn tactics and lies, distortions and slander of Mr. Obama?? They have been playing dirty politics from the get go and you are too deep in your Clinton slumber to be able to wipe the old, moldy Clintonian cobwebs from your eyes! Seems like your ears are full of those old, moldy cobwebs, since you cannot hear (acknowledge) how dirty the Clintons are!! You go back and hide in the Clinton Pit of dishonor, dishonesty, and ugliness!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Dave in NM — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:16:54 GMT

Oh, the irony. I came here hoping to find people working to prove the article wrong. Instead, it's largely just the same old baseless trashing of the Other candidate. Vogtcha is right. We'd be far better off with either Democrat than with McCain, and all we're doing with all this bickering is working to see that we get 4 more years of McBush. I support Obama, but if Hillary wins the nomination, she'll have my wholehearted support. I'm thoroughly disgusted by those of you who threaten to hold your breaths and turn blue (well, away from "blue") if your one gotta-have-him/her candidate isn't nominated. I sincerely hope that's just posturing, and that, come November, come what may, you suck it up and cast your vote to end the failed policies that are driving this country into the ground.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

gedenb — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:17:41 GMT

I am an ex Clinton supporter. Hillary is endorsing McBush. It's clear that she thinks it's either her or no one. If you want four more years of Bush err..McCain then go ahead and let her tear the party apart because a lot of the first time voters that Obama brought into this primary will not vote for her. If Hillary thinks that her scorched earth strategy will get her the White House in 2012 this just shows the same judgment that made her think the primary would be won by her on the Feb. 5th. If Clinton does not have more delegates than Obama and she somehow gets the nomination, how is this any different than Bush stealing the 2000 election? Before you say that she is just following the rules, that's what the Republicans say about 2000. Democrats in Pennsylvania please consider that she can not overtake Obama in the delegate count and a brokered convention comes into play. Vote Obama save our country from for more years of Republican rule!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

CoffeeeCandy — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:17:54 GMT

smarternu (March 7, 2008 at 5:06 PM)

How does a turd run a campaign? This is what I mean .. crap like this being posted instead of the issues . The advisor is a Professor for Harvard. Obama tried to get the best for his camp. but now that she said the *BAD WORD * Now hes a turd Good Grief .. Do you screen your post before clicking the tab *Post Your Comment*

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jackjack — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:18:40 GMT

@placidgirl7

Im an evangelical and you know what I SEE. I see people bearing FALSE WITNESS on Barack Obama. Either CALLING him a muslim or implying as HRC did on CBS with her 'well as far as I know', when she knows good and well he is a Christian. She doesnt have the integrity to acknowledge another BELIEVER because it wasnt politically advantageous to do so. Just keep the lie going-thats what she did. Do I need to educate you on what God thinks about THAT?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

PTTP123 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:19:20 GMT

This infrahumanizing among the Democrats only serves to help the Republicans. Both candidates have flaws as do all humans. Why not draft Al Gore who really should have been our president instead of what we are currently stuck with, Senator Clinton and Senator Obama are not nearly as presidential as Al Gore. It's now the time for the Democrats to unite behind someone that everyone can support. Al Gore can be our President and a great President which this country needs. Will Senator Clinton or Senator Obama win the election with all this discord?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

camarogranny — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:22:12 GMT

It seems to me that the press is missing the mark when they dismiss Power's "Monster" remark as just another slip of the tongue of a supporter or as a spicey bit of political fodder for the day. Power's role in the Obama campaign was one of Foreign Policy Advisor; as such, I would expect a great deal more circumspection on her part, particularly when traveling abroad and conducting press interviews. No matter who's campaign such remarks come from, they work to undermine the credibility of both candidates at once and as such affect the Democratic Party as a whole. Not only does this instance cast doubt on Obama's ability and experience in selecting discreet and well seasoned advisor's; should Senator Clinton indeed win the nomination, then the shameless remark will no doubt be long remembered by others abroad. Faced with the damage by the Bush administration to the public perception of the United States abroad, this type of "slip" goes beyond one person's personal opinion of an opposing candidate and calls into question the qualifications of Obama and the finese that will be needed by our next President to restore the respect that our country used to enjoy overseas. The last time I recall hearing a leader referred to as a monster, was Saadaam Hussein! One would think with Power's level of education a much better metaphor could have been found. I can only wonder at what other harmful things might be being said behind the scenes, when party members/supporters are so openly loose lipped in public. I think both candidates would be well-served at this point in time to take this lesson to heart and remind their supporters that EVERYTHING they say is a reflection on their candidate, their party, and our country!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:22:44 GMT

LindsayCarlson: "Actually, Hillary IS a monster. She's also a LESBIAN. You can google this."

a brighter America 08: "Come on, superdelegates, YOU can end all of Hillary's madness!"

smarternu: "Angels and ministers of grace protect us from an Obama presidency-- a fool in charge, surrounded by morons, can only lead this country down the primrose path to destruction."

jinny345: "It's like 1984 and we allow the Clintons to get away with their dishonest tactics."

Skulldugger7: "After Obama's actions, there is NO WAY I am voting for that lying, cheating, divisive, real-estate company shill!"

OK, I'm looking for the messages with specific vitriolic and inflammatory phrases in them. The count in this round was Obama supporters 4, Clinton supporters 1.

To my mind, this way of talking about politicians isn't about change, or about hope. Seems to this person that it's more business as usual.

Last time I checked, an ey for an eye had been replaced by turn the other cheek. You know, Obama may be different (although it has started to sound l,ike he's more of the same after this week). His supporters online are definitely not different.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:22:45 GMT

LindsayCarlson: "Actually, Hillary IS a monster. She's also a LESBIAN. You can google this."

a brighter America 08: "Come on, superdelegates, YOU can end all of Hillary's madness!"

smarternu: "Angels and ministers of grace protect us from an Obama presidency-- a fool in charge, surrounded by morons, can only lead this country down the primrose path to destruction."

jinny345: "It's like 1984 and we allow the Clintons to get away with their dishonest tactics."

Skulldugger7: "After Obama's actions, there is NO WAY I am voting for that lying, cheating, divisive, real-estate company shill!"

OK, I'm looking for the messages with specific vitriolic and inflammatory phrases in them. The count in this round was Obama supporters 4, Clinton supporters 1.

To my mind, this way of talking about politicians isn't about change, or about hope. Seems to this person that it's more business as usual.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:25:31 GMT

CoffeeeCandy: "How does a turd run a campaign? This is what I mean .. crap like this being posted instead of the issues . The advisor is a Professor for Harvard. Obama tried to get the best for his camp. but now that she said the *BAD WORD * Now hes a turd Good Grief .. Do you screen your post before clicking the tab *Post Your Comment* "

CC: I'd be willing to give your post credence if you were as willing to publicly excoriate other Obama supporters for their choice of language in this comment stream as well.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:25:32 GMT

News Flash: The Clinton campain folk did not get fired or quirt or resign: she reshuffled her staff.

More important news flash: obama is incapable of running anything--other than that community organizing thing he KEEPS bragging about as his main accomplishment.

Geezis, if THAT is the measure of presidential ability, I can name a score of boy scouts who have done more in their communities than obama has done.

Oh, wit--I forgot about his INTERNATIONAL experience: living in Hawaii and attending a posh private school, going toI Indonesia with mommy and her second man, and then visiting granny in Kenya. WOW! THAT'S IMPRESSIVE!!!!!

AS for his qualities as a commander in chief, I understand he once played STRATEGO in high school . . .

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

nebajnim — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:27:06 GMT

perfectimpressions: Your poll is neither scientific, nor unbiased. In the legal arena they would call it "inadmissable evidence."

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

grammagram — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:28:24 GMT

Surprise, surprise, Hillary IS a monster..a devious one at that. Lying and spinning are a comfortable zone for Hill.Bill. They were in the white house for 8 years. THAT IS ENOUGH. No more politics as status quo.

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/usa/2008/03/clintons_role_in_naftagate.html

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

CoffeeeCandy — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:30:13 GMT

PTTP123 Al Gore is not running. We have to support who is running however. Now with that being said lets talk about the real issues. What is the Real Problem or Problems in this country and how do we fix it. No matter who goes in that Hot Seat it will take more than 4 years to clean up this mess. First and foremost is the economy, The War, Housing .. this is what is important So talk about it

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

News & Notes — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:31:10 GMT

You Billary supporters need to get in line. She is unelectable. You need to line up behind the only candidate that is worth anything: Obama. Bottom line: we can't let McCain get elected, so you guys need to settle down and learn when a lost cause is lost.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

justchuck — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:31:50 GMT

What the aide said is true, and everyone knows it. As a long time republican I relish the idea of McCain running against either of these two. One is a man who got a free education at Harvard Law School, married a woman who got the same free education, and now goes around complaining how everything is so screwed up that he has to change everything. You can add ungrateful to untested and inexperienced. Your second candidate is the wife of a disgraced ex-president. She and her husband are two of the most disliked people in the country. They display no morals, have both been caught lying, stole items from the whitehouse as they left, and pardoned all their freinds and contributors on the way out the door. John McCain is the choice for Americans. Death to jihadists!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

loveusa — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:32:00 GMT

SHE IS A MONSTER. SHE CARES ABOUT WOMEN'S VALUES (RIGHT). SHE STOOD BY HER MAN THROUGH THE MONICA LEWINSKY SCANDAL (THIS IS HOW SHE WAS TESTED) BECAUSE SHE KNEW THAT SHE HAD TO IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE HER HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON AGENDA--TO BECOME THE FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. SHE WILL NOT LET ANYTHING OR ANYONE DETER HER FROM THIS...THIS IS HER RIGHT...TO BECOME THE FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT NO ONE WILL DEMOCRACTICALLY TAKE THIS FROM HER. IT'S ALL ABOUT YOU HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON...ALL ABOUT YOU.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

campaignburnout — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:32:50 GMT

This such B.S....just the other day the Clinton campaign compared Obama to Ken Starr...and lets not forget that idiot Bob Johnson. Clinton surrogates having been doing this for months, and as far as I know this is the first time I have ever heard such a negative comment about Hillary come from someone in Obama's campaign. All you Hillary supporters need to get a grip.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:33:28 GMT

coffeecandy: you are judged by your friends. However, a president is judged by his cabinet and his choice of advisors. So, the fool he selected went to Harvard. And what, pray tell, equates Harvard with heaven? It is just a school (where grades, as has recently been reported, have been inflated as much as obama's ego). His selection of Powers and Goolsbee demonstrate that he shows NO TASTE/SCRUTINY/INTELLIGENCE in his advisors. What is MORE important, HIS advisors should ot be shooting off their big mouths without first running it by him. THat campaign has NO COMMUNICATION. This is a sign of what kind of a poor leader he would be-incapable of selecting competnet and diplomatic advisors/cabinet members and of getting his team to coordinate much better. Face it, he is NOT COMEPTENT.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

alisonw — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:33:57 GMT

Samantha Power has dedicated her life to fighting genocide

She is on the side of right - exactly the type of person you wish would be in government

She was an unpaid advisor to the campaign and took a leave of absence from teaching at Harvard

She is 38 years old, has already won a pulitzer prize and was in Europe promoting her brilliant new book on the UN diplomat who was killed in Bagdad a few years ago

Now why would we think we deserve someone like that in out government when we could have say --

Howard Wolfson? Mark Penn? Terry McAuliffe? and so many others

brought to you by the nation who re-elected George W Bush in 2004

hope dims--

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

gandulara — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:35:32 GMT

People wake up !!!! Obama is nothing but a lying, cheating normal politican that is basically telling people what they want to hear to get to Presidency. The worst part of him is he actually believes he is Martin Luther King Jr. up to the tone of voice. Beware of the serpent as in the Bible they sugarcoat their deceptive ways.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jackjack — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:35:42 GMT

@ smartenu

Patti and her second in charge QUIT. You are misinformed.

Obama has run his campaign better than HRC. Fact

The remarkable thing to me about HRC supporters is you guys really DO like to fight. You like this 'us vs' them' thing with the Republicans. NOTHING will ever get done that way. It will be more 'oh the right wing is after me', 'finger wagging and lying', oh lord what did Bubba do today?

I was a LOYAL Clinton supporter in the 90's. I defended him through all his indiscretions. It was a painful time-always wondering what next..what next.

Its time for a change in this country. Obama EPITOMIZES that change. To the dismay of his supporters he is NOT going as LOW as the REPUBLICANS are going to go if they get a swipe at HRC. We are doomed to REPEAT history if we dont learn from it. HRC supporters obviously slept through that lesson.

OBAMA 08

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:36:17 GMT

a brighter America 08: "Seems like your ears are full of those old, moldy cobwebs, since you cannot hear (acknowledge) how dirty the Clintons are!! You go back and hide in the Clinton Pit of dishonor, dishonesty, and ugliness!!"

aBA08: This is an example of the brighter future you claim right to?

smarternu: "Oh, wit--I forgot about his INTERNATIONAL experience: living in Hawaii and attending a posh private school, going toI Indonesia with mommy and her second man, and then visiting granny in Kenya. WOW! THAT'S IMPRESSIVE!!!!!"

S: A candidate may not have direct foreign policy experience, but then we hope that they will choose their team of advisors wisely. Sometimes it takes two or three times to find the right fit...but they can be found, and do good work for America.

JackJack: "Do I need to educate you on what God thinks about THAT?"

JJ: Please, do. After all, the idea of left-wing evangelical Christians running our lives is entirely less scary that right-wing evangelical Christians running our lives... right? I freely admit to being an agnostic - but in my reading, I seem to remember that a certain carpenter said "He who is without sin should cast the first stone." Or have you in your zeal forgotten that tenet of your beliefs?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Arizona Girl — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:38:25 GMT

If you are going to publish this petty stuff, get up on the latest facts. It was not the Obama Campaign that contacted the Canadians. It was, guess who, the Clinton Campaign. You guys blew this out of proportion last week and I believe it had something to do with Obama not doing as well as he would have. Could we please graduate from high school and learn about who can solve the problems concerning this grand country of ours?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

nebajnim — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:40:40 GMT

perfectimpressions: I just breezed through the posts to simply get proof that your poll was biased and found that you forgot to tally smarturnu's "turd" comments into the totals: So not only is your poll nonscientific, and biased, but it also ignores information which is contrary to it, making it just plain wrong. ;)

And if Obama is a real estate company schill, what would whitewater make Hillary? Bill Clinton got disbarred from Arkansas.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

LF2007 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:41:39 GMT

As many people that I hear calling Hillary Clinton the B7368 from Hell, I'd think calling her a monster would appear to her as a step up in the world. As many four letter words as she used when angrily addressing those she apparently considered underlings - according to numerous, numerous publications - it seems ludicrous she would be upset. She is the pot calling the kettle black. Looks like a double standard to me.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

CoffeeeCandy — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:41:46 GMT

perfectimpressions you are right !! We all need to get together as well as the Dem Camps. Look at what we are doing..We are showing the world that we as a people of USA can not pull it together . Put aside your personal feelings and attacks and lets work together as a complete unit. Nothing worries another group, state, or country, then to know there is a strong unity within people. Think about it

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:43:46 GMT

coffeecandy: It IS an issue. I don't want a nincompoop in charge of the US. So the advisor wrote a book--idiots can write books. If you are goin by best seller writers, here is one for you: MEIN KAMPF is STILL in publication and has sold more copies than obama's or powers' books. Is THAT you criteria for suitability?

Get a brain, for goshsakes and think instead of getting all googly-eyed over a celebrity-seeking hound. The man cannot cope with challenges, he makes fine speeches when he is in an auditorium (albeit speeches BORROWED HEAVILY FROM OTHERS) but has very little of substance to say when cornered one on one.

In short, I have no respect for him and would be terrified if some accident of chaos put him in the White House. He is so empty of real substantive thought and know-how that this nation would do a tailspin.

I know of at least two dozen close associates, very liberal Democrats, who would vote for McCain rather than let this inept loose on the nation--especially at a time when we need someone with real abilities. And I know my associates each know at least tow dozen more of the same mind.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jackjack — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:43:59 GMT

After all, the idea of left-wing evangelical Christians running our lives is entirely less scary that right-wing evangelical Christians running our lives... right? I freely admit to being an agnostic - but in my reading, I seem to remember that a certain carpenter said "He who is without sin should cast the first stone." Or have you in your zeal forgotten that tenet of your beliefs?

********************

and I grew up an ATHEIST till I was 25 and my parents are both still atheists so contrary to your assumption it is not my belief that its evangelicals job to beat people over the head with our bibles. The primary reason I decided to support Obama is because he understands both sides. He doesnt belittle YOU, for being an agnostic or my father for being an atheist. He also doesnt pander to evangelicals like myself. He understands that this is a pluralistic society we live in and we need to be able to sit at the table with EVERYONE. I have major issues with the Dem platforms but I'll vote for the person who I believe will exercise moderate JUDGEMENT and talk with tax collectors and prostitutes instead of turning them away.

Thats what I believe.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

membery — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:44:09 GMT

Who cares, just goes to show that people will always behave like... people. :(

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:46:42 GMT

nebajnim:

you are incorrect. My referring to obama as a turd was the highest compliment I could realistically give him, so it is positive, as far as I am concerned. he does not deserve more. And turds, like ivory soap, float. Which is basically what he does-floats on the adoration of his lemmings.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

News & Notes — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:47:44 GMT

Obama is the answer!!!!! Billary is the disjointed beast here. I'll vote for McCain before Billary.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

CoffeeeCandy — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:49:48 GMT

So why has HRC ask that he join her on the ticket. But lets's just place all of that hatting to the side for a moment. Smarternu, may I ask what is important to you in terms of the first fix for AMERICA and of course whom do you think can represent us and why? Now mind you just straight talk no bashing just the facts ok. I want to understand your mind set on the views.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

rofe — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:57:41 GMT

News and Notes - if you would vote for McCain before Hillary, personality, not record or policy mean anything to you. Pathetic!

oBAMA OR cLINTIN - YES i HAVE A PREFERENCE BUT WILL VOTE FOR WHOEVER GETS THE NOMINATION. wHY? bECAUSE i FEEL WE CANNOT TOLERATE 4 MORE YEARS LIKE THE PAST EIGHT.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

a brighter America 08 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:59:10 GMT

Hillary is UGLY and a TWO-HEADED MONSTER, there is NO doubt about that!

I notice the Clintonistas are out in force today, lying about and besmirching Mr. Obama. Get over it Clintonism followers, Hillary is NOT going to be our President! Oh, I know, it is all those highschool and GED grads and the ones with even less education that are posting here today. All those people on welfare who think Clinton will give them something, all of those who live their lives dependent on the rest of us working folks. Those who are too damned lazy to get out and work to support themselves and their kids. They are the ones that think we, the working people, OWE it to them to support them. Same kind of thinking as Hillary, YOU OWE ME!

Hillary has the following bases as her supporters:

1) Poor white single mothers with a highschool or GED diploma, or less education

2) Poor seniors over 65

3) Latinos, probably those with a highschool or GED diploma or less education

4) White women who vote for her because she is a woman

5) Poor white males

Yes, Hillary, you have the BEST supporters in this nation.

To the rest of America, I encourage you to support and vote for Mr. Obama, he is a man of integrity, honesty, and has a very impressive record as a legislator in both Illinois and the U.S. Senate. We want to move forward!

Hillary would not be able to change anything....ALL she wants to do is Fight, Fight, Fight. Well, fighting does NOT accomplish anything, period.

Superdelegates, please end this mess; align yourselves with Mr. Obama! He is in the lead in all factions--most delegates, most voters, most states won, and a very impressive and superior legislative record. Surely, you don't want HIllary fighting with you all of the time. And fight she will if you do not agree with her!! Come on, superdelegates, get the ball rolling and do the right thing for your country!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

kilroyrogers — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:00:32 GMT

Last night in a theater during a play I glance over at a middle aged woman wearing an "International No Sign" button with Barack Obama as the subject. She was a Hillary Clinton supporter. Shouldn't she be wearing a "No McCain" button instead, I asked. Got a smirk back. Coupled with the LGBTQ community and its undying love for all things Clintonian, I feel like there are many unfair knocks against Obama. I will reluctantly support Hillary if she is annointed, by some chance. The real target here is the Monster McCain. This bickering is weakening everyone. -Roy Rogers Oldenkamp wehonews.com

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hite64 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:02:21 GMT

Just curious: How did the Clinton camp comment to the Candians--to take the NAFTA issue "with a grain of salt"--escape your attention. Could this just be media bias? Playing favorites? Moreover, Goolsbee was not directly quoted, but the Clinton aide was...Interesting. By the way, isn't the whole point about NAFTA more about tweaking the agreement and therefore making it more equitable for American workers and industry? It seems that the memo you have included says, well, just that...Curious, isn't it?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:03:10 GMT

obama has nothing to offer. oh, he has hope and dreams and marshmallows and pink clouds etc etc. Seriously, all he delivers in his big speeches is cotton candy fluff. HOW will he do this? WHAT has he ever done to demonstrate what he CAN do? His slate is BLANK. Now, I understand that obama supporters like change, but tabula rasa when we are engaged in 2 wars, in a energy crisis, environmentally challenged, in recession, etc etc seems like precisely the WRONGEST time to say, "let's vote for the kid who just moved into town!" When he DOES inch towards a plan, oddly enough, he echoes much of what HRC has said. Basically, it is "what SHE said, except I am better" but HOW and WHY better? Well it appears in his mind he is. Now if he would only SHARE with all of us EXACTLY how he is better.

Look at the freakin middle east, for godsake. It is as clear as a pimple on Jessica Simpson that the best thing for them to do is to STOP FIGHTING, NOT KILL ONE ANOTHER, RATIONALLY NEGOTIATE. It ain't gonna happen. Hasn't happened in over 50 years and it won't happen in the next 50. And if some putz thinks having them hug one another, attend diversity training, and singing kumbahyah is going to FIX their agnst, they need to stop smoking whatever it is they are smoking.

Hence, my disdain for obama. He speaks in happy grandiose themes, but none of that will bear out on political reality. Look at another issue: AlQaeda doesn't like us. The only alternatives we have to make them not want to kill us is 1) convert to Muslimism or 2) die. WE are ot prepared to do either. They are not prepared to give in. Fact of freakin life, even if it doesn't make me feel all pink and fluffy inside.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

barblze — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:03:51 GMT

Not only is Clinton a monster but she is a low life insider. She cannot win unless she acts like a republican sludge machine, that she does very well. At three o'clock in the morning she is not the person I want answering the phone, and I also don't want her whore hopping husband there either.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:11:04 GMT

BTW; HRC did NOT ask him to join her on the ticket--never happened and never would.

Goolsbbe DID say it to the Canadians and he had to ea crow for that--as did obama for not reigning in his staff. And should the Clinton campaign have let that slide? Get real. If a Clinton advisor was reported to have had talks with AlQaeda about forgive and forget re 911, do you think that the obama campaign would give her a pass on that?

See, that is obama's problem: he is childlike. He wants to play in the game, but unless he wins all the jacks, he gets cranky. And if someone else gets the card he wanted, he cres. it is called a POLITICAL RACE. This means that people are competing for a place. COMPARISONS are being made. Is his problem that he is part of that generation that was taught "I AM SO SPECIAL AND UNIQUE!" to his detriment. That is, he simply cannot believe that anyone could or should doubt or challenge or question him? If he ran against McCain, does he expect McCain to swoon and say, "I cannot believe I am soooo lucky to get to run against the wonderfullest boy i the universe!"?

obama, put on your spiderman pajamas get a glass of milk before you go to bed. BABY.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jackjack — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:11:12 GMT

@smarternu

and its the cynicism that runs through you, borne out of decades of watching the same people deal with the rest of the world in the same way that brings you to this 'all knowing and wise' position of hopeLESSness.

The arrogance of men to think that the rest of the world views Barack Obama the same. To elect Barack Obama will send a message to the rest of the Planet that we ARE as great as our Constitution says we are. We will have finally gotten PAST our PAST.

But I guess if the past always worked to your favor you would say 'why change anything?'

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:13:02 GMT

nebajnim: "I just breezed through the posts to simply get proof that your poll was biased and found that you forgot to tally smarturnu's "turd" comments into the totals: So not only is your poll nonscientific, and biased, but it also ignores information which is contrary to it, making it just plain wrong."

NJ: When you did your breeze through, did you notice that I cited a different passage from the same posting by that poster? Or would you have preferred I award double the number of hit points to posters on the Clinton side of this brouhaha?

Of course it isn't a scientific scoring system. But I already take for granted that Clinton supporters will be argumentative - that has always been the style of traditional democrats. I just figure that the hypocrisy of folks claiming to be great supporters of the candidate of "change" and "of bringing a new and different attitude" who then use the same no-holds-barred-scorched-earth rhetoric to support their candidate is something that should be pointed out.

With folks showing these attitudes, why should I, as an independent voter, want to support or be identified with the vitriol on either side of this cat fight?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

tired and old — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:15:18 GMT

Hillary Clinton is a " MONSTER "---- big deal. The Clintons are low life --- big deal.

Clintons use dirty tricks without remorse; Yet, they feel that they have a patent on the use of dirty tricks.

WOW! No one else better use Clinton dirty tricks.

Being secretive covers up their evil deeds.

Why is it that the media does not press them on their secrets and their dirty tricks?????

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:22:45 GMT

jackjack:

there is a world of difference between cyncism and reality. and an even bigger one between bright eyes goofy foolish golly gee ness and reality.

obama and, apparently, his supporters think hugs and happy are the answer. Clearly, they have their heads . . .in the sand and cannot or will not look at the world AS IT IS.

oh, you wanna CHANGE the world! Uh, how you gonna effect THAT change? Prayer? Weenie roasts with your enemies (oh my yes, there ARE enemies!)

Are you so blind to reality that you think a wash of bright pink paint and balloons will make everyone all better? You must be under 12 to believe that.

I used to teach history and, one thing students erroneously always said was that they wanted to study to LEARN from past mistakes. Bloody few folk ever learn and they are completely unwilling to see THEIR OWN mistakes. Oh, yes. NOW we say Columbus was a very naughty man and plantation owners who enslaved people were deos! But if I pose to them the same issues about enslaving animals/eating animal flesh or what our goal is in exploring other planets, they do not think there is a comparison. And I would guess YOU don't think so either. Well, slaveowners were totally justified in OWNING slaves (rad the numerous books of their era which explained why it was actualy good for the slaves to be owned) and breeding them and Columbus did a wonderful ting, according to the folk who benefited from his ventures.

No, we are not raly that smart and if you believe you are, you are surely not smart at all.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Ellen — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:24:01 GMT

Ya, except it was really the Clintons who were reassuring Canada. Check your facts!

GObama!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:25:54 GMT

Brighter America 08: "Oh, I know, it is all those highschool and GED grads and the ones with even less education that are posting here today."

Wow. You are really determined today to prove Mr. Romano's point. Let's see, hmmm...

While I don't support either candidate in this fight, my wife does. Let's see. She's middle aged, holds a master's degree in education and ius working on her doctorate, has been a teacher for a number of years and is a community leader on a number of projects, including youth sports, and being on the board for a local charity.

Based on that description and your "benchmarks" list, which candidate does my wife support?

If you really believe what you type:

"Well, fighting does NOT accomplish anything, period."

Then why would you choose to make such vitriolic, hateful and elitist statements.

Do you really believe that statements that denigrate other people in racist, sexist, ageist and elitist terms would prove to me that your candidate is really the better choice?

I'm really curious abiut this, How do you think such a diatribe as what you posted would make me, and independent voter, want to support a candidate that someone like you, who is willing to publicly state all of the views and beliefs that are abhorrant to me, want to vote for that candidate?

At least John McCain publicly apologized when a "supporter" publicly spewed such hateful speech in Cincinnati. I'm curious if any of your fellow Senator Obama supporters would be willing to repudiate and apologize for your remarks.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:29:23 GMT

jackjack:

Uh, I am not quite clear how electing obama will show that we are "past our past" as you say . . .

If you are referring to his (half) blackness, I will call you on that and say the rest of the world will look at electing Hillary Clinton and see that we have got past our past by finally--after 220 years--electing a female rather than yet another male. A real accomplishment since nations known for being far more macho-oriented and anti feamle have had female leaders.

Please don;t be a racist or a bigot when commenting on how the world views us.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

redbobfire — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:31:17 GMT

I would be careful about shooting arrows at Obama while claiming to be a history teacher. History has shown us that the Clintons degraded the Presidnecy once and will only do so again. Imagine Bill with time on his hands and an empty Lincoln bedroom........

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:36:42 GMT

Goolsbee did the talking, Goolsbee was at fault and did a very stupid thing. obama did a stupid thing by enlisting the support of a fool.WE ARE JUDGED BY THE COMPANY WE KEEP.

AS is true of all obama supporters, they fail to realize, reconginze, or admit any errors on part of their lord and master.

It does not matter if Hillary CLiton herself made a great big handpainted red sign that announced this gaffe to the world and screamed out HAHAHAH while hlding it up over obama;s head.

The POINT is, Goolsbee was a dope and his lord and master denied the accusation befoe findng out it was true.

obama DENYING something before he even knew what was what is a BAD SIGN for a potential leader. "No, no we did not declate war on you!" and then finding out someone in the Pentagon pushed a button. "oops" will not make it in the world of politics, kiddies.

TWO STUPID STRIKES for the obama camp.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jackjack — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:39:20 GMT

Sir…your mindset is sad. Life has obviously sucked the optimism out of you~perhaps good that you are not in charge of molding the minds of the young people. To encourage surrender to the ways of the past is the epitome of mental slavery. Your perspective that physical slavery was good helps to understand the ease with which you carry your own mental chains. The most compassionate thing I can say is that I’ll pray for you. Truly.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

tuxedocat — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:40:40 GMT

I find the Clintons' win-at-any-cost mentality monstrous. I supported them in the 1990s. I still admire them. But she is fatally flawed and definitely not the best candidate at this point in time. If the Democratic party, via super-delegates, unwisely nominates someone other than the person with the most pledged delegates, then they deserve to lose come November. What a betrayal of those in whom the future of the party rests. Monster? Not really. Monstrous? Yeah, I feel that way.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

quixel4321 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:42:42 GMT

PLAcidgil7 - i see quite clearly how you are attackingg Hillary and bearing false withness on her.By declaring that you are ann evangelical and somehow thinking that makes your words have anymore meaning is very presumptious,pompous and veryy prrideful-hmm seven deadlyy sins much?He is as much a Christain as the Christain that attacks Hillary with Racially Divisive attacks in South Carolina-He has an attack checklist of what he could "GET" Hillary on to accuse her of things against black voters(stuff that someone could take as racism if they wanted to).This wasextremely digusting and about as RACIST as you can get.This guy at least has elements tha you could question,not beyond the shadow of doubt,because he goes to a church that is not very Christain-like.Not judging,it is just a fact.His church gives one of the biggest racists in AMERICA a life time achievement award and looks up to him..hmmm thatt gives people pause there -anyone that has ever been offended by the venom Fahrrakkan has spewed,his race hate filled speeches against whites and jews forr starters and his extremist Islamic(not ordinary muslim beliefs since you are playing a game of semantics)views.The churches publishing and his mentor Minister views on 9/11 being because of the white man and the jews treatment of others.-THIS IS HATE SPEECH...This is not Christain like in anyway!!!!! There is a lot to question on his spouting im a Christain of the same church for 20 years.The truths surrounding his assertions of being a Christain and then yours saying you are an evangelical makes one's eyes want to digg deeper ,when most Christain do not share these kinds of Hatefull beliefs and is exactlyy the opposite of Christain values.Just you saying damnnnnn im a Christain doesn't make you a good person and an extreme hypocrrie when the truths come out of what you believe in about other people.Any other candidate would have been thrown out of the election process in shame for a fraction of the things this guy has done or said and the skeletons in his huge closet.I see you judging Hillary too and you know what god says about that?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

divad — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:47:25 GMT

All you Hillary supporters are proof as to why the human race is'nt more advanced than it is.

Geez! Still clinging to the past and old politics like it's a virtue. Let's end the 20 year rule of Clinton/Bush.

GObama!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:50:07 GMT

You know, there are times when I read this board that make me want to take my head and bang it repeatedly against my desk.

jackjack, you have completely missed the point,. What the history teacher is trying to say is this:

Human beings have throughout history made choices that at that time seemed to be and were justified as good for people.

History has also shown us that when we humans look backward from a more enlightened and experienced place to our past, we find that the rational for those decisions was not as good as we originally thought.

The history teacher is not condoning slavery in any way. He's stating that in the past, people did - and were able to produce a number of valid, accepted, well-reasoned arguments (usually of an ecominc nature)in favor of the practice.

He does not state that those arguments have validity in the present day. However, bercause you percieve him as an enemy because he does not support a political candidate that you do, you chose to misinterpret his words. Whether this was a deliberate action on your part is something only you and your conscience can decide.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:52:20 GMT

redbobfire:

your sex life must be very sad if all you can focus n is someone else's sex life. If having illicit sex is the worst you can point to, you really need to do better. How the hell cares? Do you also check the dictionary for dirty words?

It was a dumb thing to do. And dumb to deny. But I can give you the names of dozens of guys who have done it in spades.

Funny how Clinton bashers trow this up at Hillary: she is a loser who stayed with him.

If she left him, she would be a quitter. Hey, look to your left and your right. Chances are you or your neighbors have gone through the same crap.

Well, at least Bill's wife did not say that she had no PRIDE in the country UNTIL her hubby ran for president. That foot in mouth chick ought to be muffled and sent off somewhere.

They are both so unbelievably FAKE that is is laughable. I lived in South Chicago and there are parts of the neighborhood which have been very desirable. Neither one was a poor kid. His wife's dad worked for the city, by all measure, a decent middle class job. Obama went to posh private school and his single mom was taking up with different men and following them around while doing anthropology studies. He likes to play the black boy raised by a single mom card which is utter bs. He went to private school in Hawaii for rich kids--NOT public school. By his standard, Anderson Cooper is also a child raised by a single mom-Gloria Vanderbilt!

He attracts all the well to do, educated white voters who can feel noble and good about supporting a (half) black guy (what my step dad calls white guilt). He plays on his black side to gain support of black voters who (sometimes want to) believe he is their voice. He doesn't speak for me. He is another guy with money looking to get himself situated for his own good. Like he gives a rat's ass about REAL kids of REAL single moms who don;t have a dime to rub together. He jockeys for the votes of (mostly) white college kids who haven't had to start repaying student loans yet and who are going to have sticker shock when they get their first paycheck (IF they get a paycheck with the economy as it is) and who relae to him as some hip hiphop bro. No, he is not a member of the Black Eyes Peas. he is a Harvard boy from a good family who lkes to pay you.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

quixel4321 — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:55:26 GMT

I'm sorrry placidgirl7 that was directed att jackjack who clearly thinks he is above others.He has an i am superior attitude that you can tell frrom just reading a couple of his posts and his attacks on others.LOL an evangelical my azz -well maybe one that doesn't trulyy believe in the ways of GODd as many don't. I see i all the time at work people spouting biblical quotes to show how much better they are then others and somehow thinking because they can quote stuff and wrrite or speak eloquently somehow makes you better then others..WOW what would GOD think about that,FALSE IDOLIZATION of oneself-PRIDEFUL MUCH?HMM ONE OF THE 7 DEADLY SINS I THINK MR. EVANGELICAL.. WHAT A HYPOCRITE!!! IT'S PEOPLE LIKE you that make others hate people that are of faith.You breed hate with your own hate....Obama has a win at all costs mentality by the way and i think a lot of his beliefs that he shares with his church and Fahrakkan are truly monstrous.You are known by the company you keep in his case many many bad influences.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

fara — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:00:21 GMT

hi,

what about the Clinton camp comparing Obama to Ken Star? And what about this: Clinton seems so fickle--one moment she's saying in no uncertain terms that Obama is too inexperienced to be President and the next moment she's intimating that she may consider him as her running mate. Doesn't she know that the VEEP is just a heartbeat away from the President? If we follow her train of thoughts would he not also be too "inexperienced" for the VEEP? And really what experience does she really have to answer that red phone at 3AM. What experience does anyone have to do that? No president could be experienced enough for that. But what a President could bring to the situation is SOUND JUDGEMENT, and Obama has proved he has that------his vote against this war and his views on al-qaida in Afganistan and Pakistan.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

not_another_american_idiot — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:01:32 GMT

Thank you smarternu, that is the most intelligent posting I have read in a while!!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

divad — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:05:00 GMT

"I did not have sex with that woman!"

I agree you are know by the company you keep.

GObama!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:08:16 GMT

You know, Hillary is an attractive, intelligent, sincerer, and thoughtful person. She is also, no doubt, a polltician and does what politicians must do to survive.

It is uncanny how her detractors address her husband's sex life, her looks, her own sexuality etc etc. Not credible. Heck, Eleanor Roosevelt was ugly as sin and spoke like a reed and did fantastic work on behalf of human rights WHILE FDR was sleeping with the secretary. It's a good thing SHE never ran for office, I suppose . . .

Those of you cranks who truly want to believe Hillary murdered Vince Foster and satined his underwear and dragged him into the park probably also believe she is leading the space alien invasion of our world.

She did NOT support NAFTA and has said so (see factcheck.org-- a non-partisan site for reporting EVERY candidate's boo boos and lies). Why ddn't she say so during Bill Clinton;s admin? That would have been very uncomfortable, no? Does not take a genius to comprehend the etiquette requirement there.

AS for jacjack misunderstanding my point, correct. He sees only WORDS and does not look for meaning-- indicative of why he chooses to support his candidate. Words over meaning.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:14:14 GMT

fara;

Hillary NEVER said she would consider him for VEEP. NEVER EVER EVER. P<EASE, someone understand this.

obama NEVER VOTED against the war. Get your facts straight.

he OPINED that he was not in favor of it. BUT, that is far different from putting your vote where your mouth is. He has a record of NOT voting on many issues. In that way, one can never be accused of a position--by never TAKING a position which is RECORDED for POSTERITY.

HOWEVER, once the war was underway, he DID vote on other aspects supporting it (see factcheck.org for more info on this). ON the other hand, he was a member of the committee on the war in Afghanistan and NEVER ATTENDED A MEETING of that committee. So, while vets are being sent to Afghanistan and getting shot it, it was not important enough to sit on the committee CONCERNING that theatre of war? I can only guess it was-again-his way of not committing himself so it could never come back to haunt him. If it goes badly, he can say "I wasn't part of it" and if it goes well, he can still say he was ON the committee.

Pretty slick.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

bslmom — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:16:52 GMT

For those of you who are spreading on the false story that Clinton was the one that made the comment to Canada about NAFTA and not Obama, can you not think enough on your own to investigate it. I mean actually investigate the story from what should be an unbiased source. Well, I tell you what, I'll do it for you.

FROM CBC Canada (The Canadian National News):

Hillary Clinton's campaign team has never told any Canadian officials that their candidate's anti-NAFTA statements are just political posturing, the Prime Minister's Office said Friday.

In the midst of the so-called NAFTA-gate affair, the PMO clarified — two days after it was first asked a question about the matter — that Canadian officials never requested, nor received, a private briefing from Clinton's aides on her position on the continental trade treaty

"The answer is no, they did not," Sandra Buckler, a spokesperson for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, said Friday.

Feel free to investigate further on your own if you are capable of getting past the Obama is God syndrome. Neither of these candidates are perfect as they are human, but I do believe Hillary Clinton is the best for the job. Either way, people need to make their decisions on facts and not all the retoric being bounced around. This is so insane.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:17:54 GMT

divad

If having ililcit sex with a legal consensual person is the WORST thing you can come up with, you need to get a life.

It is in bad taste and when caught you should fess up. But if having sex with Monica enabled Bill to feel good enoughy to make the economy work, I say, bring on the sex!

Look at george bush-no sex and lots of war.

I rest my case.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

GraceJeanJones — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:22:23 GMT

The "Monster" comment really does not surprise me all that much.

As an undecided Democrat, I have been to both Senator Obama's & Senator Clinton's websites with relative frequency over the past few months. By far, It seems like most of the uglier name calling comes from the Blogs on Senator Obama's website. Items such as, "Shrillary," "The Countess Clinton," "The Weasal," "The Coronation of Ms. Democrat, "The B-word," and the list goes on and on. Senator Obama's website bloggers know exactly what I'm talking about.

BUT...this is what I find confusing. Some of the nastier blogs on Senator Obama's website oftentimes end with statements like "Peace Out" or something to that effect. Do all the "personal" attacks on Senator Clinton and nasty name-calling really live up to what essentially is at the core of Senator Obama's campaign, namely, "Change We Can Believe In" Even Senator Obama's website it very self is "Powered By Hope."

I sincerely applaud Sentator Obama for so quickly accepting the resignation of the aide who made the "Monster" comment.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:23:39 GMT

apropos of nothing, doesn't obama look like the pink panther?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:32:31 GMT

GraceJeanJones

I really believe the animosity directed at Clinton is largely because she is a woman. You will note that obamites rarely address the "real enemy", John McCain, bby such verabl maledictions.

I am thoroughly mesmerized that people do not seem to shy away from citing race as a campaign issue when the most boldfaced misogyny is out there for all to see--it extends to the media pundits who are quick to point out a two point lead by Obama as a potential win while Sen Clinton can be ahead nearly 20 points and John King will say, we need to see ALL the results before we can determine . . .

Men AND Women are guilty of this anti-female thing. AS you point out, female, feminine,or gross slang for women are attached to those attacks on her. No one as yet has called obama a dick or worse . . .OR even something approximating the "N" word.

This country is very bizarre. When I consider that Latin American and Middle Eastern and Asian countries have had female leaders, I can;t even begin to fathom what ancient and occult thing keeps Americans from being ale to see a female as anything other than a biological object for recreational or procreational use/abuse.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

GraceJeanJones — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:33:51 GMT

To smarternu's comment posted just below:

What you really meant to say was:

"Look at george bush-no sex and lots of war and everyone losing their ability to make a living".

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

a brighter America 08 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:40:00 GMT

Senator Clinton has based her campaign on an erroneous claim to greater legislative and administrative experience. Former President Clinton talks up her role in his administration on the campaign trail but pointedly refuses to release any documents that would provide greater details on her actual activities there. It is broadly understood that Hillary spearheaded the response team that staved off Republican attacks and spun the many scandals of the Clinton years. As to her Senate record, no one in the press has had the diligence to lay out her record for the public to assess.

Senator Clinton, who has served only one full term (6yrs.), 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 website of the Library of Congress (www.thomas.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 Jonn 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 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 facts 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),

**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 enter 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 the spin meisters and mindless twits. I challenge Clinton supporters to name a single legislative accomplishment that demonstrates her superior experience.

Posted by: Mark |

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

GraceJeanJones — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:40:11 GMT

To smarternu regarding your comment to me:

I say "Here Here!!" Hopefully, others will read your comment. I do agree that it is very bizarre that so many other nations, cultures, etc., have no problem in electing a woman as their leader, except the U.S. Maybe in some way this is related to why the U.S. is the only country of all modern western democracies that doesn't have Universal Health Care.

Alas, if I'm the only one reading your replies, all I can say is, "You preachin' to the choir, Sistah!"

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

pugs — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:42:35 GMT

I think people are missing her title of Foreign Advisor. Wow, if you goofed with some of these countries like that it may be inexcusable. Yes the Prince of Suadia Arabia is a Geek, oops thats off the record, Gee Putin was a wimp, oops that is off the record, Gee the European Community thinks they are all that with their euro oops that is off the record. You are right people that are expected to be advisors to what could be our commander in chief should know better and know when to keep theri mouth shut.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

a brighter America 08 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:45:54 GMT

Posted By: smarternu (March 7, 2008 at 7:23 PM)

apropos of nothing, doesn't obama look like the pink panther?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And doesn't Hillary look and act like a hyena attacking its prey?? Oh, that infamous Hillary cackle!! And her many ugly and horrific personalities!! Oh, and those lies, lies, lies, and more lies. Oh, that unstiable, obsessive hunger for power!!! AT ANY COST!!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

khurd77 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:46:16 GMT

All the Clinton lovers are going to come out and defend her and say the sort of things they have been saying FROM THE START....(like this Romano character) but in the end their BS will prove to be nothing more than that.. .BS..... you can call us (Obama supporters) stupid, fake, meaningless all you want... but like it or not MILLIONS of Americans support Barack Obama 100% Now, if you really think all of those people are stupid then maybe you need to reevaluate YOURSELVES. One more point, even though Hillary has fooled many "working class" people, if they took the time to anyalyze WHO is supporting her financially they would see that the "average guy/gal" vote is very much with Barack Obama... i.e. over 90% of the 55 million dollars the campaign raised came from SMALL DONORS!!! Hillary CANNOT say the same. Monster.... I really dont think so... I think Hillary means well. However, the driving force behind her campaign is to simply get a woman ANY WOMAN elected and it is rooted in Hillary's MONSTER-LIKE personall ego and ambition. In short... she and her supporters need to start thinking about thier party and more importantly OUR COUNTRY more than their obsessions. OBAMA 08

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

chattympc — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:50:16 GMT

Regardless of who you support the issue is not the "monster" remark or even the comments that followed. It is the fact that an associate behaved and spoke in this unacceptable manner while being in a position that would require her to show the United States and other countries dignity and respect.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:50:17 GMT

a brighter america 08

you neglected to mention that obama did not VOTE ON the transparency bill. Another PRESENT! rather than committing himself. his excuse (and he has dozens whenver confronted)? Present is when you don't like some aspects of a bill.

Well, here's news: MOST BILLS have SOME aspect that you won't like. So, if he had to vote on a bill allocating more funds for veterans health benefits BUT it had another part about money for a bridge, he would vote PRESENT.

He would SPONSOR a bill on transparency, but not vote on it?

The good people of NY happen-largely-to like the job Senator Clinton is doing.

As First Lady, she met with dignitaries and heads of state, represented the US at various diplomatic functions here and abroad, and was an eyewitness to the workings of government first hand. She has seen and experienced the job as few others could -- which means she has a very keen understanding of its pros and cons. And I am going out on a limb here to bet that the job is a lot more intensive and demanding than, say, being a community organizer.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

GraceJeanJones — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:57:30 GMT

To smarternu:

The (mostly very) liberal City of Ann Arbor, MI's City Council is on definitive record with a Resolution dated 12-03-2002, a resolution that easily passed 7 to 1, that they are against invading Iraq.

Maybe the City of Ann Arbor, MI City Council, with all the judgment they showed back in 2002 should be elected as President.

I apologize Senator Obama, but as a Senator in the State of Illinois Senate, representing a very liberal south side of Chicago district, I'm not sure that you could have been on record any other way than the way you were, namely, against invading Iraq. I agree with and applaud your decision at the time, but I was against invading Iraq in 2002 as well, does that make me qualified to be president? Certainly not.

However......I believe you are an excellent candidate, you just need to forego the spin and get back to the root of your campaign, "Change We Can Believe In!" Being a spinmeister is in direct conflict with the very soul of what your campaign is all about.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

H. Aslan Aslani-Far — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:57:46 GMT

Sen. Obama doesn't have to sink to Sen. Clinton's level, his campaign must only persistently address the question of transparency and continue to pound away at the Clinton's refusal to make public their tax returns for the last 8 years (which, are truly relevant as she loaned her campaign $5 million last month and every other candidate in the race has done so -- in particular because the Clinton's have a long and scandalous history with contributors, business associates and shady deals including Sen. Clinton's cattle futures investment that yielded a 10,000% return on a $1,000 investment), demand release of White House records detailing her supposed "foreign affairs experience" as First Lady, and press for release of documents related to the Presidential pardons which have so far been denied (including reasons why President Clinton pardoned Marc Rich who was a fugitive at the time). In CA, Sen. Clinton's name may well appear in the on-going trial of Anthony J. Pellicano whom Mrs. Clinton retained to spy on opponents and dig up dirt and harass everyone from Monica Lewinsky to Gennifer Flowers. The Clinton's have plenty of baggage and will hang from the straps of that baggage if only further exposed. In bringing to light these facts, Sen. Obama is not stooping to dirty tricks, but rather is holding Sen. Clinton to a fair standard...not attacking her, but asking legitimate questions whose answers are worth knowing...

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

chattympc — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:58:11 GMT

Kudos to smarternu! I agree with it all :)

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:58:14 GMT

khurd

how WRONG you are. Hillary had initial support from large donors, but her diligence, stamina, intellect and value have impressed so very many that this campaign is supported by donors who offer single digit donations as well as larger ones. AND< since 3/4, she has gained over 35ooo NEW supporters on her website.

And then there is TONY REZKO.

obamites are usually well to do, as I stated before, who don ot KNOW what most of America is oging through economically. Connecticut yuppies, college kids not yet paying of their loans, She has the REAL bread and butter Dems in her corner. The fashionistas who follow obama, I predict, will not become loyal democrats. I don;t even know if they will participate in voting again. He is a media flash and that seems the biggest draw.

As for your any woman comment, don't yu know that:

the driving force behind obama's campaign is to simply get a black ANY BLACK elected and it is rooted in obama's PRETEND SAVIOR-LIKE personall ego and ambition. In short...he and his supporters need to start thinking about thier party and more importantly OUR COUNTRY more than their obsessions. HILLARY CLINTON 08

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

chattympc — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:00:55 GMT

Kudos to smarternu! I agree with it all :)

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

GraceJeanJones — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:04:46 GMT

To Khurd77:

I'm not sure if it is "Shrillary" or "Shrill Obama Supporters."

To All:

Name calling and shouting does not make your arguments any more persuasive.

(Although I do understand that in general Senator Obama does do well among younger voters. Maybe that's where some of this is coming from.)

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:07:22 GMT

H Aslan:

MOST of the stuff Clinton was charged with (and I am talking of BILL Clinton here) were vacated.

Again, if his sexual escapades are the focus of your petty frustration, I suggest you get a life--or a partner of your own. This has NOTHING to do with Hillary Clinton's competency as Presidential material.

Cohabiting with a shady Tony Rezko IS a thread I would like to see explored ON THE RECORD with obama--who refuses to address it.

Senator Clinton says she WILL release her tax records after 15 April (geezis, I haven't done MINE yet).

So, which CONVICTIONS against Senator Clinton are you referring to that make her ineligible for President?

You are a rumor monger and are fishing for anything to muddy the case that obama is vague and unsuited to leading a nation.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

tenchan — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:09:30 GMT

~LOL~ READ your comments, Mr Romano, go on the Facebook walls and read how everyone in the various campaigns treat one another. It's 100% absolutely true! Because we work on the internet, individuals from every aspect of every campaign don't care that there's a person on the other side of the keyboard! It's horrible, and I think every single supporter that engages in this sort of horrid behaviour should be completely ashamed of their behaviour.

What I find even more disturbing is there's a very very few of us working to quell the venom. Thus far, my experience dealing with anyone with other campaigns has been poor, and for roaming onto another board to (honestly) ask questions while being non confrontational, I was reported merely for supporting another candidate. It's an aspect you should probably investigate yourself, don't identify yourself as a reporter and just watch how poorly they treat one another. It's inhumane and terrible treatment. I'm ashamed of any fellow supporters that behave in such a way.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:10:16 GMT

divad: "All you Hillary supporters are proof as to why the human race is'nt more advanced than it is."

Divad: OK. Let me for a minute give you the benefit of the doubt. That's a pretty broad statement. I'd like to understand it better.

Are you stating that anyone who relies on old political tactics - such as:

- an organized get-out-the-vote team that uses phone banks to ensure their supporters show up;

- fundraising through dinners, direct mail appeals, the internet and personal phone calls;

- television ads

- signs and buttons and t-shirts;

- endorsements from established, old-style politicians like Sen Kennedy, Sen. Kerry, etc.

Are you stating that using any old-fashioned tool like these can't envision the future?

You can claim the other side uses the "politics of the past." But you should also know that this same argument has been used, in one form or another, repeatedly throughout American political history.

I'm curious as to what you would define as a more advanced human race.

Fewer wars? War and conflict is the natural state of mankind, bred through instinct from our earliest tribal ancestors who gave us the legacy of "us versus them." (If you doubt that this is a valid argument, I recommend you look at the rhetoric on this board as proof of that).

Less poverty? Throughout human history there has always been an inequitable distribution of wealth. The idea that it should be reapportioned through forced reallocation to be distributed "fairly" is a relatively recent development in human history, one that has so far been an abyssmal failure - one of those ideas that society looks back upon and states it wasn't such a good idea. We can discuss specifics - but for a succinct wrapup, remember this - Everyone always assumes it is the OTHER GUY's wealth that should be redistributed.

I'd like to know your views on this. I hope you will reply.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jaisen — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:12:08 GMT

Hmm i know if obama doesnt get elected, he can go on as a televangilist, thats where he can preach take money from the people who have none and "Heal his follower" at least there they have carpeting for the FAINTERS.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

GraceJeanJones — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:12:14 GMT

I really just love the term "fashionistas," I think it very much captures the essence of many of those in a Vermont coffeehouse somewhere sipping an $8.50 latte and eating (albeit an extremely small portion of) Ben & Jerry's new flavour, "Cherries For Change."

I agree also very much that I am afraid that once some of these younger college eduacated folks face paying off their student loans, that they will very soon become tried and true Republicans, quickly abandoning the "bread and butter" democratic principles that brought them into the process in the first place.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

View from Here — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:12:59 GMT

Clinton has had one fundamental strategy all along, and she has been quite explicit about it. It consists in dragging Obama down to her own foul level of politics, thereby proving that he is just another "ordinary" politician. I.e., ATTACK THE MESSENGER. She will go to any lengths to achieve this, including the consistent imposition of a double standard: It's okay to smear Obama, but not to smear her; and let's not forget that Obama lost both Ohio and Texas, even though in fact he won Texas.

My view all along has been that this outrageous strategy will work, however nauseating it is. The result? After a vicious fight at the Democratic convention, Clinton will probably be the nominee and John McCain will be elected in November.

For a perfect example of exactly the same kind of attack-the-messenger technique applied in another domain, cf. the slimy response of the directors of a museum in San Diego to an article exposing a fraudulent exhibit aimed at hoodwinking the public:

http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/did-christian-agenda-lead-biased-dead-sea-scrolls-exhibit-san-diego

Note that the museum directors used a pseudonym to respond to the critique of their exhibit. This type of cowardly behavior is exactly what we see happening with the Clinton camp, who release photographs to smear Obama and then deny they did it. This will go on from now until the convention in August. Don't forget that the museum exhibit took place, without a single newspaper pointing out that it was utterly biased and simply presented a bunch of lies. The same thing will happen with the Clinton campaign: it will work, because the media moguls want to see McCain elected in November.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Mauibrad — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:15:10 GMT

"Monster," huh? How come we never hear about Hillary's Whitewater and cattle options perfect investments anymore?

Aloha, Brad

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

gtlenahan — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:16:22 GMT

Can't the Democratic hopefuls, and we, all just get along. If they/we can't before November, time to flee to Canada before NAFTA becomes a Constitutional amendment. smiles.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

BeijingJack — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:16:55 GMT

Sharing one's bed with the Commander in Chief does not qualify that person for the job. Candidates should be forbidden to speak AT ALL about other candidates, period. If they can't win over the American people with their own ideas and policies without turning it into a knife fight then they lack the dignity, confidence and ability to sit in the world's most powerful seat. All the numbers indicate that Obama already has the nomination with or without the supposed "super-delagates" because they would never vote en-mass against the popular vote unless they wished the Democratic Party implode and hand the presidency to McCain. Period. Its the end, and everyone with more than 5 brain cells knows it, but for some reason the media wants to continue to pontificate on possibilities that don't exist in order to "sex-up" their stories.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:17:46 GMT

GraceJeanJones:

Cherries for Change--I love it.

Wish we could keep talking--I have got to go try to earn a decent living. Sorry to end our conversation. have a good night and keep fighting the good fight against the putzes!

Have a great night!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:17:56 GMT

Brighter America 08: Earlier in the discussion I brought up a comment by you and asked for your clarification. Looking since that post, I can see you were busy doing an thorough analysis of congressional records (thank you for that, by the way).

However, since you finished that research, I would still like you to respond to my earlier post. As a courtesy to you, I have reposted it here to save you the trouble of trying to find it.

****

Brighter America 08: "Oh, I know, it is all those highschool and GED grads and the ones with even less education that are posting here today."

Wow. You are really determined today to prove Mr. Romano's point. Let's see, hmmm...

Based on that description and your "benchmarks" list, which candidate does my wife support?

If you really believe what you type:

"Well, fighting does NOT accomplish anything, period."

Then why would you choose to make such vitriolic, hateful and elitist statements.

Do you really believe that statements that denigrate other people in racist, sexist, ageist and elitist terms would prove to me that your candidate is really the better choice?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

gtlenahan — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:19:21 GMT

"Cherries for Change"? Love it! Next.... Obamanut & Hillaryswirl.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

tenchan — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:23:53 GMT

It cracks me up, reading through and seeing how just about every single comment illustrates Mr Romano's points, on how none of us care about one another, and are perfectly willing to follow the same route as Ms Powers. ~^_^~

I would love more than anything for a reporter to do an actual study on the supporters and see which camp is filled with more hate, more anger, and more venom. I would also love to see a candidate take an official stand and tell his or her supporters to stop beating down those from the other camps.

I think, like an increasing number of individuals both within and outside US borders...I sure as hell can't wait for this mess to be over so we can move the heck on, ideally, a large number of individuals will look back and be ashamed of conduct towards one another.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

GraceJeanJones — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:24:32 GMT

For those of you out there solely (or is it soul-ly) "Powered By Hope," (the very thing powering Senator Obama's website), you might like to read the very informative and entertaining article by Daniel Baer entitled "The Church of Obama." Please take a moment if you can. Whether you support Senator Obama or Senator Clinton, you'll like the article.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/daniel_baer/2008/02/the_church_of_obama.html

A line from the article reads, "Recent news articles have reported Obama supporters saying they would do anything he asked them to do. Halle Berry claims that she would gladly pick up rubbish that lay in his path. Aside from their humiliating absurdity - you would do what?"

PLEASE NOTE: The article is not anti-Senator Obama nor is it pro-Senator Clinton, it is commentary about us, the very bloggers on this website, etc.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

thinkingstraightgirl — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:25:03 GMT

MONSTER ISSUE: Calling Clinton II the word "monster" is nothing compared to the national distractions that we went through with Clinton I and Clinton II while she ws First Lady: Whitewater, Paula Jones, Travelgate, Filegate, Vince Foster's death, Monica Lewinsky. In the case of the latter, I shutter to think about what's going to happen if Clinton II becomes President and has to deal with the distraction of Clinton I with a Monica II. Don't get me wrong. Clinton I is one of my favorite ex-presidents but I can see both Clintons have their flaws.

CRONY ISSUE: You're worried about Obama's association with Rezko but you're not worried about Clinton II's assocation with Clinton I and his associates?

EXPERIENCE ISSUE: I'm the EA for a prominent CEO and have been EXPOSED to many C-level situations but that doesn't mean I can be a CEO. Same for Hillary. Education and exposure don't equal experience.

Your turn, smaternu! (BTW, I fully expect you to refer to me as a secretary because that's the stereotypical way to be demeaning to an EA!)

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:26:50 GMT

beijing jack

read the huffington post. pop votes do not a candidate make. Ift takes many ballots by delegates to determine WHO would be most likely to win KEY STATES and who would be the STRONGEST candidate against the opposition.

Given that, the wishywashyvapidity of obama would not stand a chance with a seasoned pol like McCain.

Of course, if you like your candidates (and lattes) lite, sending obama as a dem representative to the pres race would be like sending a high school wrestler against THE ROCK.

On too many occasions now, obama and his toadies have whined and cried that Clinton is UNFAIR! and MEAN! simply when she says her plans are better. he gets all angry and his eyes cloud over and he cannot hand;le it.

McCain is not going to give him a bunting blankie and rattle and coo baby sounds at him during a debate.

Face it, your candidate cannot stand the heat. Get out of the race if you aer not woman enough to roll with the punches.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

divad — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:29:06 GMT

perfectimpressions:

"War and conflict is the natural state of mankind"

You've got to be kidding...maybe if you're a Neanderthal!

But then again, you are a Hillary supporter...they are one in the same.

Old style politics:

Lying about your opposition.

Backroom deals (lobbyist money).

Buying superdelegates

Having the Governor of Florida in your close set of friends (not playing by the rules).

Overstating your experience and qualifications.

Stealing an election...priceless.

We are a long way off from an enlightened (and advanced) society.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

BeijingJack — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:32:04 GMT

Monster....It's a Monster Machine baby. I want international election advisors to come into the U.S. and monitor OUR elections...The fact that Obama receieved ZERO votes in 3 or 4 of heavily populated black districts in New York was quickly snatched from the news.... I wonder why?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

kindli — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:34:19 GMT

If both Obama and Hillary were white men, would there be this much hatred on both sides? Both candidates seem to have the same goals, with minor variations - other than Universal Health Care, which I support. Hillary is a politition, she seems capable of learning and going with the flow. She also has proven herself strong enough to stand for what's important, while adjusting the other goals to what people want. I'm not sure how this makes her dishonest - or wishy washy. Even in our regular day to day lives we need to know when to give in and when to stand firm - are we so incompetent with our own actions that we hate her because she is capable where we aren't?

Anyway, from what I've seen, she is a strong person, and is capable of standing firm when it's important, and giving in if someone else has a better idea. I know I'm not interested in another Bush. The fact that she can stand by her husband even after he cheated on her shows her loyalty to the vows of her marriage (for worse, as well as better) - which I see as a portent to her loyalty to the vows of Presidency, even when her critics are making it difficult.

It appears to me that Obama wants to win this as 'Mr. Nice Guy' - which is great. Except this is politics, and 'Change you can believe in' only works when *everyone* is willing to change - not just himself. Our Country is in the beginnings of a recession, we're currently fighting a war in Iraq, and our resources are stretched pretty thin in that regard, as well as the numerous other issues which we are all aware of... Are we going to beat or at least neutralyze the threat of the terrorists in the USA with a nice guy persona? While he can sway the voters into liking him, and trusting him, and adoring him and his views - can he do the same with our enemies?

Now he's going to start criticizing Hillary, because she won Ohio and Texas supposedly by using negative campaigning against him? Is this grade school? It couldn't possibly be because they felt she was the better candidate. Of course not. She used the resources at her disposal to make people think about him as *more* than a charismatic man that we personally like, and she's the bad guy? It appears to me that he's playing the victim card just as much as she was accused of doing last week.

Talking about experience on either side is ridiculous. Not that it will stop them, but there is no true experience good enough to make one deserving of President. Being married to the President, and being a Senator for longer gives Hillary an edge, but it doesn't make her more qualified. Her personality and her tenaciousness, and her views and her ideas, and her ability to come up with plans, that helps make her more qualified - at least in my view.

Why do we need to like the person we vote for? I don't personally know Hillary, Obama or McCain. Nor do I feel that I need to know them like a buddy. I don't care if I ever sit down at a meal with them and get to chat. I don't need the President to be my best friend.

I want someone who will be capable of getting us out of this war, and of improving our economy, and improving how other Countries view us. White, black, male or female - it's about time we stop worrying about our personal grudges and think with our brains. Not that anyone will listen, of course. I think she's the best candidate - not because she's married to a past President, not because she's a woman, and not because she's been in politics for longer. I think she's stronger than Obama without being gung-ho, (like McCain). We need strength right now - power is fine, but strength is more dependable. From what I've seen, Hillary is willing to listen to her advisers, she's willing to think and change her mind when it's necessary to do so. She is mostly the opposite of our current President, and that has to be a good thing. Obama is more focused on doing things 'his way' and this is too close to Bush's tactics for me to trust him.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:36:33 GMT

View From Here: "Clinton has had one fundamental strategy all along, and she has been quite explicit about it. It consists in dragging Obama down to her own foul level of politics, thereby proving that he is just another "ordinary" politician."

Hmmm. An interesting point you raise, VFH. But I'm curious as to how Senator Clinton is "imposing" this double standard? By complaining through her press liaisons that the media was treating her more roughly than Senator Obama?

Would you be willing to consider the possibility that the press was tougher on her until about 10 days ago? After all, I've still yet to hear a comment from the media about anyone in the Obama family that matches David Schuster's "pimping out" comment.

As for Senator Obama geing an ordinary politician...hmmm. I will grant that he is an outstanding orator. He has a unique ability to communicate his ideals more clearly. Because he knows that, he crafts his speeches to contain more emotional content than substance - it plays to his strengths - a very smart thing to do.

Is he an ordinary politician? No. An ordinary politician would never have gotten this far. But does he exhibit the typical traits of a politician? There, I would have to disagree with you.

He has a tendency to say the politically expedient thing - he does play to the crowd. But it is a very rare politician who will play to the truth, rather than the crowd.

He has flip-flopped - even this run for the presidency is a change from a previous, publicly stated position. Is that wrong? Not necessarily, although it seems he does get a bigger pass for this than Senator Clinton does.

He has avoided issues. For example, his explanation for voting "present" multiple times throughout his State Senate career in Illinois sounds suspiciously like the "I voted for it before I voted against it" explanation from Senator Kerry in 2004. Was such a tactic wrong? No...but ii was a shrewd political move - again, a move a typical politician would make.

He has used surrogate campaigners to use stronger and sharper attacks than he himself was willing to make in public - thus allowing himself some distance if the attack turns out to have negative political consequences. In this regard, he is very much like the current opccupant of the White House, who has used Dick Cheney in that role for years.

My own comclusion ius that Senator Obama is a politiican first and foremost. If he wasn;t he'd be working in a law firm somewhere. He is attracted to power, as all politicians are. He has ambition, as all politicians do.

As for myself, I'm admittedly cynical. I believe that all politicians have "truth issues." For me, I can easily tell when they are lying - their lips are moving.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

GraceJeanJones — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:38:32 GMT

IT'S THE ECONOMY, STUPID!!! (Is calling you stupid considered name calling???? What's worse being called "Stupid" or "Monster")

You all may not have loved the 1992 - 2000 period (maybe some of you are even too young to remember this period a lot), but I will say this, when I picked up the newspaper, there were "Help Wanted Ads" to reply to. And...every once in a while, when I did reply, I actually did get an interview. I'm not sure I can say the same thing today.

So whether it's Clinton or Obama, or Clinton/Obama, or Obama/Clinton, we Dems need to pull together to begin to undo what the past 7 plus years have left us. Incremental change in a good direction is positive change nonetheless.

I do believe that in November (still 8 long months away) when the election really does count, another rousing chant of "YES WE CAN!!!" or another Black Eyed Peas song won't necessarily cut it against John McCain and the Republicans.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

mrsbabs237 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:40:49 GMT

I am almost 75 years old and never believed I sould see the day when an african-american as refreshing as Barack Obama would or could possibly become President of these United States. He is a very polite, intelligent, and brilliant young man who has captured this nations people, both young and old, with his special talents. Only one in a million like him can come along and encourage the people to stand together and force our government to do the right thing by even

thinking about truth talking ....i e telling us what we need to know and dare to try something different. I hope he succeds in becoming our president. There is nothing in the Constitution that says that our president should have experience. He has lived 46 years. As an african american myself, I know what he has experienced in his life because I have experienced almost twice as much. I am not surprised at Hilary and Bill Clinton's tactics and I pray that Barack Obama does not fall into the trap that they are setting for him. He is much better than that. I know in my heart that they will try to take the race any way they can, by force or trickery if necessary.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Gwen — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:41:39 GMT

Jaisen 3/07/2008 comment left me wondering why waste the readers time. I'm assuming that he is not a Obama supporter, and has a problem with a candidate who is great speaker, and has something positive to say. Would you rather continue listen to our current president, who sounds like he did not benefit from a College Education?

With all of the Mud tossing from both democratic candidates teams, it's a wonder that the real issues will ever be addressed. The media continues to stir the pot.

I was a Hillary Clinton supporter , who admired her for being Intelligent, and tough. Currently, all I see, and hear is whinning, finger pointing, and so hypocritical. To include your husband presidency on the resume is laughable. I hate to say it, I fear JOHN MCCAIN will be the next president.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:44:02 GMT

thinking straight;

Vince Foster's death ? hmmm...

do you know HOW MANY PEOPLE in Illinois died while obama was Senator? WHAT was HIS role!?

Experince? She has a srong education, however, more than that, she has been involved in political and social welfare/justice issues for upwards of thirty years. That PLUS her close exposure to intimate details of government (I do not know how intimate you were with your CEO), mean that she has a thorough UNDERSTANDING of the job. Case in point: everyone wants to be a princess: great digs, large clothes budget, lots of travel, parties etc.Then look at Diana. She was SO underprepared for the job. Boo hoo Charles doesn't love me. Well, it was a diplomatic match that BOTH had to agree to. He wanted Camilla but it was not going to be allowed. Every aspect of her life adn her family was under the scope. The flash did NOT outweigh the fact. IT was not a marriage, it was in truth, a job. She was not suited for it.

HRC has been there and done that: the scrutiny, the hits, the criticism , the highs and lows and she comes out standing each time. AS obama has already shown, poor judgment in his staff, an inability to handle criticism, and a lack of substance. Being the FOCUS and the main target for whatever goes on in apresidencey wuld , frankly, make him pee himself. He does not have stamina for a real hard job. Probably why he forgoes VOTING ON issues.

TRAVELGATE? NOTHING came of that so it is not an issue. You are bringin up tings that Bill Clinton was exonerated/cleared of.

Monica was BILL'S issue, not HIllary's. And I don't care if someone is having sex--unless it is with underage kids, animals or ME. And you shouldn't care. either. It was in poor taste, but NOT an issue and, if anything, it is between Bill, Hillary and Monica (unless you are an ardent fan of soap operas due to a lack of excitement in your own life).

Clinton and HIS associates? Which ones do you mean? And you are referring to BILL Clinton's associates, not Hillary's I presume?

Though they ARE husband and wife, they are not siamese twins and have done and thought INDEPENDENTLY (unlike obamites).

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

honkyjesus — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:47:02 GMT

The politics of hope has gone sour, it seems.

Good article, sir.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

steamboathunter08 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:49:39 GMT

Dem bones, dem bones

Dem dry bones,

Dem bones, dem bones,

Dem dry bones,

Dem bones dem bones

Dem dry bones,

Now hear the word of de Lord.

Oh, how I used to love that old spiritual.

Oh, how Dem now means Democrats

and how dry the bones will be as they pick

each other to pieces, like the vultures they are.

I'll take an antique war hero at 3 a.m. thank you.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:51:38 GMT

MY LAST THOUGHT:

to the 75 year old. I know what HILLARY CLINTON has gone through and that PLUS her experience make her the best choice. Don't compare your experience as a precivil rts balck with that of a 46 year old half white man who grew up in privilege in an era when interracial marriages and friendships were not taboo or outlawed. His experience is no longer that of those baby boomers and older. Is there prejudice? Sure, but it is generally your one on one bigotry and not institutionalized crap of the past. He is NOT MLK though he tries to paint that comparison. It is insulting.

But all of this back and forth is moot.

We all know MIKE GRAVEL will be our next president.

Isn't he STILL on the ballots? Did he ever quit?

Goodnight and good luck!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

austria2 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:52:58 GMT

Politics is dirty. That is why Romney quit early. As a former Mormon missionary, teaching love, charity, and humility, it pained him to criticize his opponents.

But to be president of America, one must be tough and survivor to face these: wars and rumor of wars, $9 trillion debt, sliding dollar, recession, high college cost, $106 oil, lost of jobs, hungry people, hurricanes, earthquakes, etc.

He who wants to be commander-in-chief of the most powerful military in the world and wants to control the button on our nuclear bombs and then complains from the legitimate questions of Hillary about readiness and qualifications does not deserve to be president.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

thinkingstraightgirl — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:53:59 GMT

I signed on hoping for mature and logical discussion of the issues. I'm really saddened to see that so muc of this site is dominated by smarternu's anger management issues.

No smarternu, I'm not one of those unaware self-centered yuppies that you assume anyone who raises a criticism of Hillary is. I'm a cancer survivor who is severly financially strapped due to my after and side effects, and grew up in poverty,

I'm excited about this election and the possibilities presented by both of the candidates. I'm scanning the pages and am deeply saddened to see that there are a few on this site who simply don't get how important this election is and are using the site in lieu of therapy.

I'd like to keep participating but if some of you are going to feed into smarternu's anger then I'll read and blog elsewhere. I know, smarternu and friends, you'll be sad if I decide to go. What's sad is that your anger isn't allowing a mature discussion of the issues that we need to be focusing on.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Mandelay — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:58:55 GMT

Thank you for an intelligent, beautifully written article. Unfortunately, as many of the postings here make evident, you are right on target with your analysis of what the supporters of each side have done to the other. Keep writing. You're good.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

abcz — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:00:28 GMT

what a bunch of crock

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:01:37 GMT

thinking straight:

I am a cancer survivor trying to make ends meet and grew up in the projects: don't presume you know me OR that you have some special light because of your cancer,or poverty. That is so much crap.

I support Hillary BECAUSE she has the BEST plans and STAMINA and EXPERIENCE for bringing us HEALTHCARE.

obama gives healthcare to all kids. Very nice. but I am a middle aged person with NO KIDS and I need health care--as do the PARENTS of kids (or who will care for the kids when uninsured parents croak due to no healthcare).

Growing up in the projects and dealing with prejudice and poverty and recently with cancer and more poverty makes me NEED to THINK STRAIGHT and that thinking has led me to Hillary Clinton and not to empty vague promises and pretty pictures of what could be. I want to know what WILL be.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Gwen — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:01:51 GMT

Perfectimpression comments I respect, but do not agree with, and yes you are very cynical. SAD!

While Hillary Clinton is clearly whinning about being treated roughly by the press, just imagine if she is nominated. No one has forgotten the fact that her husband was caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Monica even kept the dress, will we see this again?

You have to be clueless if you think that whole ordeal will not be brought up again. I voted for Bill Clinton, and honestly do not want to see him back in the White House.

To compare Obama with anyone currently in the White House is LOW. You could have come up with something more clever. We will never move forward, if we continue to be so negative towards anyone who is positive, and doesnt have any secrets ready to jump out of the closet.

I unfortunately smell a REPUBLICAN WIN IN NOVEMBER 2008. That is something to fear.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:02:13 GMT

Divad: " 'War and conflict is the natural state of mankind." You've got to be kidding...maybe if you're a Neanderthal! But then again, you are a Hillary supporter...they are one in the same."

Divad, first off, I did not use an ad hominem attack against you. Perhaps you believe such attacks are a correct way of discussing a disagreement. Unfortunately, that displays a certain level of immaturity. I would hoe as we trade comments back and forth across the board, you could find a way to restrain yourself.

As for your items - I'm assuming by making them, you are claiming the candidate you support (Senator Obama) has never done any one of these things.

Ever.

In his entire political career.

If you truly believe this, then I am sad for you, because it displays a naivete that is at times truly staggering.

"Lying about your opposition" - Despite the fact that the Clintons were cleared of the Whitewatre allegations in late 2000, the Obama campaign has subtly alleged that the issues need to be revisted.

"Backroom deals (lobbyist money)" - Sentor Obama has returned money contributed to his campaign by Mr. Rezko, who did lobby him while he was in Illinois. Just because you have returned the money doesn't mean you never took it in the first place. That would be sort of like this whole "reclaimed virginity" nonsense.

"Buying superdelegates" - I'll admit, this is the first time I've heard this charge. If you mean applying influence on superdelegates by making promises to contribute to their campaigns (which, by the way, is legal), you really believe the Obama campaign, if it has a surplus of funds, will not reward those superdelegates who support him by contributing and making joint campaign appearances throughout the fall? It's called quid pro quo - and it happens in politics.

"Having the Governor of Florida in your close set of friends (not playing by the rules)." - Which rule? Asking that the delegates of Florida be seated? Or not campaigning in Florida? You are aware that Senator Obama did run national campaign ads that played ion Florida just before the primary date there - aren't you?

"Overstating your experience and qualifications" - On this one, I agree with you, wwith one caveat - bboth Democratic candidates have done so. In regards to international experience, though, you have to consider that Senator Clinton, while First Lady, did make a number of state trips outside the country, representing our country, and did meet with leaders at that time. While those discussions may not have been substantive, they did establish an initial rapport - a get to know you sort of experience. Thus, she would be more experienced at the nuances of other heads of state. As for experience on the war...I know Senator Clinton ( and McCain, for that matter) went to Kosovo and Iraq together, on a joint fact finding mission as part of their Senate committee duties. I seriously don;t know - but has Senator Obama ever visited the troops in Iraq - or anywhere overseas in his two years? As the subcommittee chair who was responsible for the Afghanistan issue, dod he ever visit that country?

"Stealing an election" - Which election?

- Senator Clinto received more popular votes in Nevada, yet received less dlegates.

- In every primary where the voting was restricted to Democrats only, she has won by double digit margins.

- The Obama capmpaign, before Super Tuesday, stated that superdelegates should follow the will of the people in their home states. Yet when Senator Clinton won the primary in Massachusettes, Senator Obama said they should re-examine that position - especially in light that his super delegate endorsers - Senators Kennedy and Kerry, and Governor Patric - would be forced to vote for Sentor Clinton.

"We are a long way off from an enlightened (and advanced) society."

I'll agree with this. However, I don't think we'll be any closer to it if any of the three remaining candidates is elected President.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

adastra8 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:04:12 GMT

I think that the most important number from last Tuesday's exit polls is the "satisfied with Obama/satisfied with Clinton" number. Is it just me, or is that puppy going down? Democrats have been remarkably fortunate so far in that both candidates had 70+ approval ratings from all voters, regardless of who won. But if that number is starting to fall, I'm seeing the beginning of the end - the party is about to rip itself apart while Republicans look on and laugh. Infrahumanization, or whatever, the nature of the race has changed.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

chillywill — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:05:38 GMT

Someone from Sen. Obama's camp calling Mrs. Clinton a monster make front page media attention. A picture being circulated clearly trying to make a false association between Sen Obama and extremism gets only a brief story. Is this what Mrs Clinton is referring to when she states that the media is treating Sen. Obama more favorably than her.

Get a life, make Mrs. Clinton tell us about her tax returns, all of her qualifications, and why she is our agent for change. We only have to go back approximately 8 years ago to see the sweeping changes the Clinton's brought to Washington than. It was called George Bush. I believe that the Clinton's actions, scandals, and corruption were the propelling force behind the American people voting for change and against the democratic party in general. George Bush was this change and can we afford another one of the Clinton's changes in Washington?

Someone calling Mrs. Clinton a monster drawing all this national attention after all this country has endured with her scandals and smears is nothing short of scandolous in itself.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Rowanna Darkwolf — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:10:05 GMT

I agree we should further inquire into Obama' relationship with Rezko. While doing so, however, I believe we should be inquire into Clinton's relationships with Norman Hsu, Abdul Rahman Jinnah, William Danielczyk, and the T.R.O., all of whom proved to have illegal ties and all of whom contributed "bundled contributions" to her campaign. I'd also be interested in some sort of real and honest explanation of the picture of her and her husband with Rezko, in which he has his arms around them both (clearly this isn't just some "nameless, faceless person we took a picture with"). As long as we're going for full disclosure of our candidates involvement with possibly corrupt donors, do let's be thorough, shall we?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Mandelay — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:11:35 GMT

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

thinkingstraightgirl — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:13:59 GMT

Smarternu, I thought you were going to work. I didn't say I grew up in the projects. I grew up poor in the suburbs. And I didn't say that I have a special light. If I did, I'd know how to get you the financial and emotional help that you need. I see that you're assuming that I'm African American because I made a criticism of Hllary. That would be like me assuming you're a lesbian.

I'm not pretending to know you although you reveal so much of your anger to all of us on this site instead of channeling your energy into giving us an unemotional and logical defense of Hillary, which would be some much more HELPFUL to all of you who are trying to make a decision about which candidate to choose.

If you really want to help Hillary get elected, then be SELFLESS and put aside your anger, and calmly explain your position to all of us. Be SELFLESS and give Hillary the gift of your voice in a clear, mature, unemotional and selfless manner. Or, go to a Hillary campaign office and volunteer your time.

Am I crazy, everybody? Do you think that smarternu is actually smart and can do the right thing for his/her candidate? Help us out. This election is way too important to get lost in anger.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:16:39 GMT

oh give me a break. Wolf Blitzer and John King are engaged in a contest for who can suck obama's toes best. If I didn't know better, I wold swear they were gay for him. John King kept STARING at the map on 3/4 trying to find a way to spin it so that he could believe Clinton was not getting the votes she got. My god, if obama farted, King and Blitzer would have called it an angelic trumpet blast!,, They are such obama toads it is as if he paid them with kisses. If you don;t see that, you have a glass eye.

Here's another News flash: HILLARY CLINTON DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH MONICA LEWINSKY. Those dinks among you who keep raising this as something anti-Hillary need to replace that glass eye. Bill did a naughty thing. BILL BIIL BILL. SO get it straight, already. Hillary handled it with dignity--more than I can say for you obssessed bashers. The fact that you cling to this sex issue demonstrates a clear lack of something in your own lives. My od, it was over ten years agao and who gives a flit?Maybe the sex was good-I dunno. All I know is that the economy was and that was good enough for me,

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

JRanger — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:16:44 GMT

For me it is quite simple. If Barack Obama gets the nomination he gets my vote. If Hillary Clinton gets the nomination, John McCain gets my vote. I do not think she is honest, and I do not trust her or her husband to what is best for the country.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Gwen — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:17:56 GMT

Smarternu

I respect your comments, but at the same time I disagree with your reasons for supporting Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton has not shown stamina, she is constantly crying about being treated unfairly. Her experience is a Attorney by trade, 6 years as a Senator.

Do remember when she decided to run for a Senate seat for the state of New York? The same critics said she had No experience,which she did not at the time. She did not listen, and ended up winning. Now she is doing the same thing, how hypocritical. She has never been president, she was the former president spouse.She made NO EXECUTIVE DECISIONS!

So include it on the resume, but LORD FORBID if you also includes the rest of the MESS. The media will bring up the past, and yes I did vote for Bill Clinton both times.

There are no gurantees on either candidates plans.

I did not grow up in the Projects,but I have faced racism, and poverty. Every politicalcandidate makes promises, why are putting Hillary Clinton PROMISES on a Pedestal?

When the election is over the very same candidates are no where to be found.

So you understand correctly, all children do not have Healthcare. Parents are struggling to make ends meet, so they can pay the hefty premium every month, Obama has nothing to do wth that, ask the Insurance companies.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

khurd77 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:18:50 GMT

smarternu , I certainly am NOT a yuppy or well to do person. I was raised poor and I have been in the military for 10 years. Just because you THINK I am wrong does not mean that I am. That is another thing about Hillary supporters...they will not listen to anyone else's opinion because they know they are right. For the record I think Hillary means well... I think she is essentially a good person. However, its her core motivations that I question. And no, I do not support Barack because he is black..that is so far from the truth. I am 32 and white. I grew up in an area where there were very few black people but if you are suggesting that I am not a racist then you are right...I am not. I know for a fact that many people in my home state of Ohio did not vote for Barack because he is black. I called the county DNC rep and she told me she "was not a black lover". and oh by the way she was a hillary supporter. Do I think Hillary is racist NO I DO NOT. Again, I think Hillary is a good person, but her judgment is clouded and I know from my own experiences that some of her supporters are that way. Let me clarify... I am not supporting Barack Obama because he is black but because I believe in my heart that he is the best person in YEARS to come along as a candidate, and I dont support Hillary, but not because she is a woman... I would be elated to vote for a woman....I REALLY believe that a woman can do anything a man can do and many times better.... but Hillary Clinton is not the best PERSON for this job.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

OBWan — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:19:59 GMT

3am phone call. -

Hillary - Bill its Iran.

Bill - Call in the UN inspectors. Where's a no fly zone when you need it.

McCain - Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Iran I'm going to....

Obama - Get me the Sec. of State, Sec. of Defense, Joint Chiefs....

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:21:02 GMT

Gwen: "To compare Obama with anyone currently in the White House is LOW."

Hmmm. OK. How about this:

He has used surrogate campaigners to use stronger and sharper attacks than he himself was willing to make in public - thus allowing himself some distance if the attack turns out to have negative political consequences. In this regard, he is following a pattern that has been used successfully throughout the presidential election process for years. Examples of the successful use of this have included Dick Cheney's role in the Bush 43 White House, Ed Meese's role in the Reagan adinistration, and Joe Lieberman's role during the 200 presidential campaign.

As for Ms. Clinton complaining about press coverage - you may be right, but we're now hearing similar comments coming from the Obama campaign after 10 days, when the Clinton campaign arguably endured it for approximately 60 days.

As for Bill Clinton's failings - how does that reflect upon Senator Clinton? Are you saying that the indiscretions of a spouse should be fair fodder for a decision on a candidate? If so, are you willing to place Mrs. Obama (she of the only now is she proud of our country remark) through that same level of scrutiny?

Senator Obama has a positive attitude. I wholeheartedly agree with that. But he is a politician. He is drawn to power like a moth to a flame, and is willing to do anything to get there. The "hope" he prescribes is a calcualted decision on his part to make himself appealing to voters. Is it wrong? Obviously not, because it seems to be working. Just because a strategy is political doesn't mean it's wrong.

As for not having skeletons in closets - Senator Obama has followed a brilliant strategy of trying to get out front of any such revelations by admitting them himself. But one little problem - his first book, which describes his early dug use, is a stated fictional account. He stated that himself at the begining of the book. Thus, I do not know for sure what other closets or skeletons he may have.

I just refuse to see the junior senator from Illinois through rose-colored glasses.

As for fearing a Republican win in November - that depends. We have survived for years with one party in control of Capital Hill and the other in charge of the White House. As an independent, I distrust being out of balance to either the left or the right.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

khurd77 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:27:18 GMT

I suppose all the Hillary supporters think that anyone that disagrees with them are idiots. Well this smells more like a GWB-like attribute than most things. If you have something to say respectfully then say it. Like, I said I think Hillary is a good person, BUT I do not want her as my president, and no not because she is a woman but because she is the wrong person for the job. It really is that simple.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

PatrynXX — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:27:50 GMT

Actually the real problem is in Clinton's lap. Basically she's built up this I'm a woman let me speak stuff... then slambs another woman (and I guess we can say gender and race had nothing to do with it) for speaking her mind. Uh Hillary, did you shoot yourself in the foot? So your for women, except women who don't agree with you. Good , real smart. And not apologizing for the Ken Starr comment is going to come back and haunt her for it. The monster comment was pretty light weight compared to the name calling going Obama's way. :(

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:28:12 GMT

Thinking girl:

I ME ME grew up in the projects. Please read and understand the words.

BLACK?? Did I say you were black somewhere? I guess since you thought I meant YOU were from the projects that projects = black. THAT is an assumption that YOU made, and a bigoted one at that. And it appears from your tone that "accusing me" of being a lesbian would be a negative thing. Again, please try to avoid bigotry.

I am only angry at stupidity and vapidity and the inability of a number of voters to THINK and research rather than swallow pretty rhetoric and flashy events.

I do work for HRC because it is worth my time. I am sorry that you feel that you have to use your cancer as a way to make your case. Your insinuation was I am poor, I am sick , oh poor me and yet I am doing the RIGHT thing.

Get over yourself.

There are many, many people out there with cancer and other issues that are more concerned with what is best for them and for the nation than how swell and pretty their candidate is in his shiny suit.

Try not to use your illness as a crutch-it is demeaning to people who deal with it and don't bandy it for sympathy votes

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:31:40 GMT

OBWAn:

It's 3 AM

HIllary: Get General Clar

McCain:(riding on a nuclear warhead) WAHOOO!!!!

Obama:Get Dr. Phil for an intervention

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

khurd77 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:31:58 GMT

I think John Edwards had it right when he said that anytime you challenge the status quo you will be attacked. Its not that most Hillary supporters think that Barack Obama would be a bad president, but that they have been convinced that the country owes Hillary something.....like namely THE PRESIDENCY! Well we are standing up and saying that NO...America does not owe ANYONE the Presidency, including our candidate. However, the way that someone earns it has to say something about them, and the way Hillary and John McCain are trying to "earn" it just does not jive with the majority of American people any more. Get over it... the 90s are over...it is time to move on.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

OBWan — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:32:19 GMT

This would serious if there were not so many fundamental flaws with the Clinton Campaign that will not take responsibility for.

Where is the outrage for the Ken Starr comments.

What about Hillary's white house records.

Hillary's and McCains non-votes on FISA.

The $170,000 from a company with 103 charges of sexual harassment.

The taxes records from last 2006.

Bill's $700,000 stock deal.

...The list goes on - What's good for the gander (male) is good for the goose (female).

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

kindli — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:32:20 GMT

The one thing about Hillary being nominated is that most people are pretty well aware of the Clinton's 'dirty little secrets'. Of which her husband has more than enough - though they aren't particularly secret anymore. But other than this 'cattle share' - which I admit to not understanding the importance of - what has been discovered about Hillary, herself? Well, that we don't already know about.

I read about people whining that if Hillary becomes the running mate, then we're doomed??? Honestly - we aren't reelecting Bill. They're married, not attached at the hip. (If they were, there would have been a menage-trois or it just wouldn't have happened. Anyone want to guess which?)

While the spouse of the running mate is important - realistically, we're not voting for them. I hope! What are we going to find out about Obama? What dirty secrets are going to be brought to light? Or in the honor of fair play - which of those dirty actions that we already know about are going to be brought out into the light as being worse than they are? He's pretty candid in his books - he's done drugs - harder drugs than Bill was accused of doing. With no choice of inhaling, btw. At least it's not a secret, I guess.

Anyway, most of the voting public already knows about the scandals of Hillary's past - and her husband. It isn't going to suddenly cause a stir that can sway the vote. If we know about it now and are still willing to vote for her, why would hearing about it *all over again* change our mind?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Gwen — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:33:27 GMT

Smarternu I see you have lost your mind. HILLARY CLINTON DID NOT SLEEP WITH MONICA but you are on some type of NARCOTICS if you don't think that mess will not come up again, and again. The media is ready to start posting outside of Monica's Doorway.

As I have said in previous comments, I voted for Bill Clinton both times. He disappointed alot of people, and I dont care how you try to clean it up.

Did you go on to say Hillary Clinton handled it with diginity? Was I out of the country? Did I miss a speech she may have made.NO! She did not, she stood by her husband and said NOTHING. You call that DIGNITY? I call that Pathetic.

It's relevent in this presidential race, because she has included his 2 terms as president as part of her VAST experience. So yes, she will have to take the good, the bad , and the UGLY. Get over it, she did. His past was a open book with each woman comming forward. We dont want to see it again, and you nor Hillary Clinton can gurantee it. If she is nominated a lot of voters will turn to JOHN MCCAIN. God help us all.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

khurd77 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:37:54 GMT

kindli I dont think its the fact that we already know about the Clinton's "problems" . But its that many people feel that it speaks to their ability to control themselves. And by the way I think Hillary herself has shown up front and in a very visible way that she cannot control herself. You cannot be president by crying every time you have a letdown. Come on now.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

khurd77 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:40:34 GMT

Although I think Bill Clinton was a good president...and much, much better than GWB.... I remember being disappointed when i found out he had lied. He lied....he cheated. Although I will remember him as a good president this election has made me realize the implications of having a blatent lier as our leader.... I dont want him back in the Whitehouse. His time has come and gone....

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:41:46 GMT

Gwen:

what is this sexual fixation you have?

yes, she handled it with dignity. She did NOT go on Oprah and cry and get Dr phil to intervene and bring up all the PERSONAL thoughts/feelings she had.

She did NOT go on Jerry Springer and have a slugfest with the wench who STOLE MY MAN!

It was an issue between Mr and Mrs Clinton and her public face was completely appropriate and NONE of OUR business.

There is absolutley NOTHING in that incident to "come up again" and it had NOTHING to do with HRC.

YOu are some wingnut with sexual phobias or obsessions if this is the most significant issue.

What do you THINK is going to happen? Monica will be revealed as an AlQaeda agent?

You are so strange

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Vanda_Sanderiana — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:41:47 GMT

While it may be commendable that Obama, with his speeches full of inspiration on change, has most likely caused so many more Americans to go out and vote, it would do him well to take care of all that he promises to the voters he has won over to his side since if he ends up being president and falls dismally short of the sum of promises and rosy scenarios of hope he presented on his campaigns... then it wouldn't be surprising if the issues on his background, on how much of his inspirational rhetoric can actually be realized, and relative political inexperience would come back and surface to bite him in the butt.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

OBWan — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:42:04 GMT

The election process reminds me of a "twilight Zone" show about a candidate and in the end he ended up in clown suit. Send in the clowns.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

khurd77 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:42:29 GMT

I understand that many people want a woman as president. I think we should have a woman as president too. However it has to be the RIGHT woman and Hillary just is not that woman. This country desperately needs a major shift and to put the politics of the past 20 years behind us and there is NO WAY that we can do that with another Clinton in the WH.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

kindli — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:42:37 GMT

oops, I apologize. I forgot that Obama had that in the beginning about drug use and the other sins acknowledged as being fictional. Hmm... wonder how many Republicans did the same thing? Bet when they start sending out their e-mails, they won't be putting that little tidbit in. (I get lots of these letters from my Waaay Right wing relatives - they always state that they're completely proven true, and then when I check on-line, they're usually proven to be true... urban legends) Sorry. Anyway, that's even worse. What shocks are going to rock the vote?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:44:16 GMT

khurd

obama whines when he is sad and he gets testy and cranky.

Hillary cry? You are crazy. That woman is stronger than your daddy. She has taken flack from a whole host of morons and has never been knocked down. Is that your problem with her? She is strong and not a weepy whiny like obama's, "They are picking on me!"

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

khurd77 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:46:32 GMT

I have to differ with you smarternu.... the issue DID have something to do with us. He stood up and lied to our faces. And although I continued to support Bill Clinton and still believe that he was a good president with good intentions.... nothing will ever change the fact that he lied to us. If the Clintons were not so bound and determined to get back into the WH, then many of us would have continued to see them in a very warm way.... however with this election and its revelations about how devious they are and how they are willing to do anything and everything to get elected, many of us see the Clintons in a very different light, indeed.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

perfectimpressions — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:46:34 GMT

khurd77: "I suppose all the Hillary supporters think that anyone that disagrees with them are idiots. Well this smells more like a GWB-like attribute than most things."

Khurd77: That's a broad brush sort of attack - one that assumes that one bad apple spoils the whole bunch. It predisposes that the views expressed by an individual belong to anyone fitting that subset of society. However, I'm willing to accept such statements if you would be willing to apply them to both sides fo the debate over the democratic candidate. I have seen numerous ststements on behalf of Senator Obama that could easily be characterized using the same statemnet. If you don;t agree, I'll be more than happy to quote chapter and verso to you from this very comment chain.

If you'd like, I recommend you look up the comments from a poster in this comment chain named A better america 08. To be honest, not only are the comments made by this poster tinged with the same idea about disagreement, they go one to make a series of statements identifying supporters of Senator Clinton in racist, misogynistic, age discrimiating, and income elitist terms. Yet when I called this out and asked if any supporter of Senator Obama would call the poster on the carpet...well, you could hear the crickets.

I have to leave the discussiong for the evening, but one final thought.

While I appreciate the ability of Senator Obama to make folks feel good... I distrust his abolity to convert these words into deeds. I would love to be proven wrong, though.

Good night, all.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:47:15 GMT

I understand that many people want a black as president. I think we should have a black as president too. However it has to be the RIGHT black and obamajust is not that black.

Thanks, khurd, for that incredibly BIGOTED reamark

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

thinkingstraightgirl — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:49:46 GMT

Smarternu, one last communication, then unlike you claimed, I actually am going to stop for the evening. It's my first time on this site but just in the last post you used vulgar references such as “suck toes” “gay” “farted” “dinks”. I'm sure Hillary would cringe with embarrassment that you've linked such vulgarity to her campaign.

And, throughout this site you keep bringing up sex and sexual references then claiming that everyone on the site, who are not bringing up the topic, are doing so. How do you expect people to take your candidate and her solutions seriously when you, as her loudest supporter, are embarrassing her? Hmmmm .... maybe you actually want everybody to vote for Obama.

At the risk of stooping to your level, rent Bob Roberts. Hillary's campaign lifted the commercial from that move. And, rent Ali G In the House. Didn't see all of it but Hillary's campaign lifted one of her phrases from the phrase on knickers of one of the actresses.

Good night, dear smarternu. I'll pray for you to ease your anger and channel your energy into a way to logically convince people that your candidate is best. Our country needs less anger.

Peace to your soul. You need it. And, a spell checker.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

rmpatera — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:50:35 GMT

The gloves are off now. So much for the politics of hope.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

khurd77 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:52:12 GMT

smarternu, we obviously have a difference of opinion, it my view Barack has actually obstained from complaining MORE than many of us would have done ourselves... I mean for you to suggest that Hillary has not been the whiner of this election is totally absurd. As far as my daddy remark...I think this illustrates the lengths you are willing to go to make your point.... enough said. I do not attack you personally.... I think you most likely are a decent person who is trying to stand up for what they believe in...just like me... but your tactics speak volumes. please.... lets be civil....I disagree with you...I do not hate you. And the fact that hillary has taken "flack" from people probably has a lot to do with her "tactics" over the years. I mean the Republicans are very devious...but they do have to have something to go on in order to continue attacks for so long and on so many different issues. The Clintons have had trouble controlling themselves and I do not want them in the WH.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:53:27 GMT

Like you would admit having sex with your aide . . .

It was not smart on his part (neither was having sex with her); nonetheless, who gives a flying crap? Really, it was SEX. It was consenual. It was not a threat to the government, didn't start a war, ruin the economy, or cause mortgage rates to rise and default.

For the last tie, this is a non-issue. And HILLARY did nt lie about having sex with Monica. She didnlt, He had sex, he lied, WHo cares?

It is such an incredibly stupid, nonsequitar rationale for NOT supporting HRC. DO you have any idea what LOGICAL REASONING is?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

detejas — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:54:01 GMT

I have to disagree with something someone posted here... the idea that Clinton has been vetted... the problem isn't what we already know. The problem is the stuff that the main stream media doesn't report... but is still out there... waiting, under the radar. The case going through the California courts Clinton v Paul. for example. Youtube it people. And what's up with the non tax disclosure. And you don't think the Republicans aren't going to relive all the uglies from the 90's....

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

khurd77 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:56:43 GMT

No, I did not care that Bill had sex...but you are wrong it does matter and people do care that he lied. You cannot say oh well he did that not hillary and then send him out in support of you!!! That is not rational! If you put Bill out there to support you then you are making him a part of your campaign!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

kindli — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:59:48 GMT

khurd - I don't think control has anything to do with it. We're all individuals, and it's our right to react to a letdown in anyway we wish to do so. Men and Women tend to react differently. Whether with crying, tears, or stoic silence. I've never seen her throw a temper tantrum, and I doubt if you have either. That would be a lack of control. But I don't understand how her normal reaction to a disappointment can be construed as lack of control.

She's in an arena that has long been dominated by men. While she has to be strong like a man, and respected like a man - does she have to also become 'butch' like a man, too?

I'm sorry, I'm a bit cynical, but if you think that the only person worthy of being President is someone who doesn't lie - we won't be getting a President. I don't know what the candidates are lying about - I can make assumptions when they start talking in absolutes - then they're lying - but if you want someone who doesn't lie, then go to church and stay out of politics. We don't live in a perfect world, and no matter who you vote into office, they're going to lie about something.

If you feel HRC isn't the best person for President, then don't vote for her. But if you are simply disillusioned, because Bill wasn't as moral a person as you wanted him to be - well, that's personal. That has nothing to do with Hillary's ability to lead.

Politicians can't keep all their promises. That's what checks and balances is all about.

As an off-topic aside - Brett Favre is one of the best Quarterbacks out there, and he cried at the meeting when he talked about retiring. Did that have anything to do with his ability once he was on the field? He's an emotional man. Why should Hillary be considered unqualified, just because she shows visible signs of emotion?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:00:18 GMT

obama has been treated with kid gloves and his complaint about the 3am ad is ridiculous. The ad indicates that the ebst person to deal with a crisis is HRC. It is, after all, an HRC ad. But, as usual, if there is anything that challenges him,he calls it negative. Chrissakes, this is a CAMPAIGN. The POINT IS to stress one's strengths and the opponent's weakness. He is far too sensitive to handle it and this indicartes he could not handle a REAL hit--from a Republican opponent (who would fight no holds barred) OR from the leaders of other nations.

You obviously failed to understand the daddy remark; maing you as sensitive as your hero.

And no, they have nothing substantial to attack her on. Like many of those Clinton bashers, they metion Vincvec Foster (a real NON ISSUE), travelgate (exonerated), Monica (nothing to do with HRC). The real problem is a strong, confident, intelligent woamn in power--which a number of men and some women cannot handle.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

smarternu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:05:19 GMT

It matters that HE lied. Not HER. And how and why does sex matter here? What rational logical fact can you point to that indicate that that is a crisis issue? Or, that it has ANYTHING to fdo with HRC?

Oh, people who lie about having sex cannot be trusted to ever tell the truth. Well, there goes 9/10 of the nation.

The kid who smokde a cigaret or drank when underage and lied. The guy who didn;t claim his 500 lottery prize on his tax form. The person who told the Avon lady she didn;t use cosmetics so she wouldn;t have to listen to her spiel . ..LIARS ALL!

I suppose there is a special circle in hell for them.

And it is so refreshing that obama has never once in his life lied. Nor has his wife, Or parents. Or children. There IS that guilt by association that you insinuate . . .

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

solskin — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:06:33 GMT

All I have to say to what's her face: if you live in a glass house be very, very careful with the size stone you throw.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

jayprakash — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:09:53 GMT

Obama should run a campaign commercial showing the multiple faces of an angry Clinton and then asking the question "Do you believe this person can really bring people together?". He should use clips of her demeanor during the last debate as well as her angry outburst at Obama's campaign mailers before the March 4th primaries. Anyone seeing this will come to the conclusion that Samantha Power was on the mark in calling Clinton a Monster!!

I hope the Obama campaign managers seriously consider this idea.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

honestymatters — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:11:03 GMT

Interestingly, this article seems to question what has been reported from Canada in their own press. Is there doubt that the Clinton campaign was involved or is there embarassment that the media got it wrong? Speaking of getting it wrong, when Bill denied his trist with Monica, Hillary called it a right-winged conspiracy -- will she be able to call it right at 3am?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

OBWan — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:12:31 GMT

smarternu -

My humor aside - This country will / is facing a real serious issue with the economy. Much of it to do with our Iraq War (invasion, occupation, nation build to US vision) and other foreign policy blunders. Even the old Soviet Union found their nation broke after 10 years in Afghanistan.

We find a dollar worth 1/2 of what it was a year ago, business closing, workers displaced, a housing loan problem, and national debt that went from $3.4 Trillion under Clinton to $9.4 Trillion (as of today under Bush) - this is growing at approximately $30,000 per second (Thats not a mis-print).

Our GDP (assets) is about $14 Trillion today, but because of slowing in the economy and the devaluation of the dollar you should expect the this number to also decrease.

Under any plan to nationalize health care there must be a the monies to finance. Neither Clinton's nor Obama plan can be financed fully under the circumstances left by Bush. McCain has no plan. The difference between Clinton's plan and Obama's is that Clinton's is mandatory - and will most likely be DOA in congress.

And yes - I am on of those under-insured people.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

khurd77 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:13:05 GMT

thats funny... i get accused of being too sensitive by one Hillary supporter, and at the same time I am told there is nothing wrong with being emotional!!! Thats hilarious! Kindli, point taken. You are correct in saying that everyone lies at some point, I will concede this and say that you are right. However, it is not that I think Barack has not or will not lie about anything EVER in his life, its that I think he has the judgment and maturity to be honest and more importantly I believe his motives are true. But like I said, you have a good point, everyone has lied. The one thing that bothers me is that it seems to me that the Clintons have had a serious problem with lying....there is a difference, is there not?? And yes, I have seen Hillary have a coniption...along with several other million people at a few times during this campaign. Now she may have not jumped up and down but one could easily see her coming close to that. She is a very accomplished woman though and I would not expect her to have a full -fledged breakdown... but then again her crying episode right before SC could be coming close. again smarternu.... you are really missing the point here...and getting more offensive by the minute....call me a wimp if you want to.. I have been to afghanistan and fought for your right to be offensive...so go ahead...I can take it...and again.....geesh....I would LOVE to see a woman as president....but NOT Hillary....WHY CAN YOU NOT HANDLE THAT>>??? maybe you are too senstive....its ok...I understand

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

kindli — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:24:58 GMT

That's true, she hasn't been completely vetted yet. I have a feeling we'll be finding out more than enough about her and Obama in the coming months. It will be interesting to see if the Republicans will have anything more to find out before these two are done with each other. I guess the gossip mongers who care more about the past and outrageous will have a field day. Our desire for the sensational will likely sway this vote as well as any other.

I guess that as long as we get a Democrat in office, I'm not going to worry overly about it. While I disagree with both Hillary and Obama on the war - I disagree even more with McCain on it. So, as long as we don't get another conservative, our future should start looking up. Hopefully with Clinton/Obama on the ticket.

Politically expedient, logical, and that way when he goes up for election in 8 years, no one can accuse him of not having experience!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

khurd77 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:25:05 GMT

hey smarternu, kindl1, everyone,...its been fun but I have to go... for those of you that care about America's veterens and want to make a difference....check this out and get involved....call your rep, senator.... take care and good luck to all

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080306/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_the_wounded;_ylt=Am.t6tphzHAGfLF69q2VRVGs0NUE

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

shade659 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:27:01 GMT

It seems to me that Queen Hillary has run a far dirtier campaign than has Obama. She has made more personal attacks on him than his staff has against her. Each time something is said that she doesn't like, she pouts and goes into a fit about the press, about Obama, about the voters not giving her the presidency which she "deserves". Her staff comparing Obama to Ken Starr was just as bad. Was that staffer fired? I think not. Hillary is no more prepared to answer the phone at three a.m. than is Obama. Why? As Obama has said, she voted on Irag now she wants to back up do it over. This is one election I am glad I am an Independent. I voted for Obama in the Texas primary, but if Hillary is allowed to steal the nomination, McCain will get my vote. All the demo's best look at the polls, Obama can beat McCain, Hillary can't. At best, after she loses to McCain, hopefully she and Bill will retire to that chicken ranch in Arkansas.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

dljacks — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:27:34 GMT

The REAL problem, Andrew, is that the remark is TRUE.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Heartlight3 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:29:12 GMT

Tthis commentary page is poorly designed, and the right hand side is obscured by the ads at the top of the page, and does not correct itself even below the advertisements and other stuff. This is very irritating because I want to read the comments, but can't make any sense out of them because I can't see a quarter of the text on the right. Can you request your page designers to be a bit more conscious when they are making the commentary pages? Thanks

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

doc1400 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:40:01 GMT

1. Today Barack Obama is running a presidential campaign based on hope and change. Yet with such undisputably good and lofty reasons to run for the presidency of the United States, he has been called a “hope monger”. About his uplifting speeches about hope, Clinton accused him of plagiarizing his speeches.

When Obama offered his public service credentials while working in Chicago instead of as a high priced lawyer, Clinton accused him of having ties to a 'slumlord'.

2. When Obama asks for transparancy and public release of tax returns he is called a member of the infamous Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy by the Clinton campaign. You sorry americans allow this. After all, transparancy if for us, the citizens of the United States. We must have information to make a decisioin on the candidates.

3. When asked about releasing her white house itineries to allow the public to determine if she has the experience she claims – she refuses or equivocates. and calles Obama “ill-prepared to be president."

4. When asked to release her tax returns to the public as Obama has requested and has done, she has refused and now equivocate by saying maybe by April 15th.

5. When asked about fairness and if Michigan and Florida’s banned votes should count (Obama was not even on the ballot in Michigan) she could care less about rules and fairness. Clinton wants to change the rules and count those delegates. It’s all about her, if it means the absence of rules – so what. Rules don’t apply to her – like the rules that all citizens must abide by. Yes, including you. Why???

6, While Obama states he will abide by the decision of the Democratic Party, when asked to work out a fair resolution to the banned Michigan and Florida primaries Clinton has told U.S. News and World Report that she opposes any sort of do-over for Florida and she would not accept it if Michigan were to hold a caucus. So much for her ability to resolve issues.

7. Clinton will stop of nothing, do anything, will observe no limits to what she will do win the presidential election. See how long you stay out of jail if you rob a bank to feed your family. Any 12 year old knows you can’t justify means for ends. And she readily admits it. If this means destroying her opponent, or destroying what he stands for and in the process destroy what may be America’s only hope at decency and humanity in this presidential campaign– she will do it.

4. Now I ask you, does Hillary Clinton deserve, no – cry out – to be called “a monster” or better yet “A Hitler.”

5. Samantha Power is the founding executive director of the Harvard University Carr Center for Human Rights Policy. She won a 2003 Pulitzer Prize for general non-fiction for "A Problem From Hell: America and the Age of Genocide." With credentials like this has Samantha Paul crossed over the line by describing Clinton “a monster” or doing all American citizens a great service by bearing witness to the truth and at the same time calling to attention to the pathetic state of America, land of the free and home to political monsters. The fact is that if a Clinton can exist in our society it is because of you. All of us citizens. It is something all americans should be ashamed of. You deserve a Clinton.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

thinkingstraightgirl — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:42:07 GMT

Smarternu, just like you I'm liar! I had to check one more time! I only brought up cancer as a financial fact. I wasn't asking for pity. Your negative spinderella was working overtime on that one. You've missed your calling in writing fiction. I'm sure we all agree on that one.

Here's your chance to do some good for all of us. So, I'll check in tomorrow night to see if you can enlighten us with what the Clinton Administration's record was for funding cancer research. Increase or decrease during the 8 years? How about Hillary in the State of New York? Only, a monster, WHOOPS! Bad Bad Me!, I mean a scrooge would decrease the funding!

C'mon, smarternu. You can do it. Turn us all on with the facts!

If you're so obsessed with our sexual obssessions, get us hot with actual facts and figures!! Clinton versus Obama on the stem cell issue. Oh baby, YES! YES! Stimulate my BRAIN with the facts!!

If you can explain the differences in their views on Medicare, I'll SCREAM SCREAM SCREAM with ecstasy!!

Guys, since I highly suspect that smarternu can't come through, can one of you? I joined this site tonight because I was hoping that facts and thoughtful comparisons would be what I found here.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

equality supporter — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:43:52 GMT

I believe we need new blood in the White House. Bill and Hillary Clinton are two tainted people with scandals that go far back.as they were born. They need to be happy they did not serve prison time for their actions. Both are just greedy and can't seem to get enough of power to save their souls. They will be remember by many American as trailer trash and nothing more. Go home Hillary and watch your man, for he will do it to you again. And this is what you want maybe.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

doc1400 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:46:23 GMT

When Obama offered his public service credentials while working in Chicago instead of as a high priced lawyer, Clinton accused him of having ties to a 'slumlord'.

4. When asked to release her tax returns to the public as Obama has requested and has done, she has refused and now equivocate by saying maybe by April 15th.

4. Now I ask you, does Hillary Clinton deserve, no – cry out – to be called “a monster” or better yet “A Hitler.”

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

equality supporter — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:53:09 GMT

I really hope the American people will open their eyes to this Hillary Clinton. She will have more women in her bed than Bill ever did. Bill could only use a cigar but she has more equipment than he could ever dream off. Bill is not able to be a man as he proved this to Monica Lewinsky. He used a cigar. Hillary uses Bill to get the Presidency and the pact is clear between them. I know that their daughter will be the one to suffer all the ugliness that their parents have shown her. But maybe she will continue their dynasty of terror and evil.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

doc1400 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:01:06 GMT

Let me repeat - The real problem with the remark by Ms Power is that it is absolutely

true.

Now about your silly comments board which cuts off the sentence length.

FIX IT.

Oh and by the way, Ms Power is so much smarter than you. And she does not

get intoxicated in her own improbocity. (:

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

katmarie — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:01:23 GMT

The Clinton camp is using tactics that are bullying and ruthless until they get what they want...they are the modern day Bonnie and Clyde of American politics, taking us all hostage of their devisive ways.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

mvago — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:02:00 GMT

She is a monster...a GOOD one, a monster that is threatening to others because of her intellegence, diligence and experience. As an american citizen whose forefathers arrived in 1743, I'm excited and proud to vote for the first female american president whom I believe will do a MONSTROUS job of signing responsible bills and laws to start solving the MONSTOUS problems we presently have. MBS

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

anotherview — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:04:20 GMT

It seems that neither campaign is devoid of error. The difference is how the US medai choses to handle it. Leave to a foreign newspaper to do reporting that is honest and to hold to their intergrity.

Perhaps the US medaia can learn something about journalism here.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Chapalody — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:08:59 GMT

If there's a dragon who spits fire, and you say that dragon spits fire, should you be condemned for saying it openly. I'm sure there are many people in Hillary's past and in her campaign who have called Hillary worst names then monster. Power was right when she spoke of Hillary doing anything to win the nomination. Doing anything falls into Democrat doctrine, by any means necessary. So, calling Hillary a monster went along with the methods Hillary will use. The term used was pretty close to the real Hillary Clinton the media and the voters have yet to see. If there's going to be a scoreboard then let's be fair. Obama has taken more insults from Hillary's camp, then Hillary has taken from Obama's. After Hillary spanked the media for treating her as a normal candidate and not as the Hillary Clinton they come to fear. The media quickly fell in line after whimpering away with their tails between their legs, to find as much dirt on Obama as they could find. In Hillary's past, it has always hands off of Hillary. All Hillary did, was remind them that things haven't changed, because there is one little thing all networks have to do. Renew their licenses, and if Hillary is elected President, she will remember those who dared treat her as a normal human being, and not the monster Hillary Clinton.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

mvago — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:15:00 GMT

Well Andrew, she is a monster , a GOOD one. One that is threatening to others because of her experience, diligence and intelligence. As an american citizen whose forefathers arrived in 1743, I'm proud and excited to vote for the first female american president whom I believe will do a MONSTROUS JOB of signing bills and laws to start solving our MONSTOUS problems. HRC, I ask you to be our new monster...we need a good one, MBS.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

thinkingstraightgirl — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:36:49 GMT

One last comment before I truly go to bed. Love note to smarternu at the end of the post.

I believe that America is not a victim and that our President that should present him/her-self and our country as such.

Remember "the vast right wing conspiracy" against her husband's administration? And, in the recent past, "I always get the first question ..." It's the "I'm a victim" posture. I fear that that's the posture Hillary would bring to a Presidency. I'm not saying she's not competent and wouldn't be a good President or that I'm for or against her. (I'm still deciding between the two.) I'm just saying those examples make me very nervous.

Speaking of "victims" as smarternu believes that I believe I am and the fact he/she is obssessed with believing that we're publicly obssessed with sex, I'll share too much: it was cervical cancer. It has motivated me to appreciate my life and my country, and the privilege of having both.

And now, smarternu, since you're obssessed with our certain parts of our privacy, I'm going to go use a device that will ensure that a part of my body doesn't fuse shut from the radiation damage. No, that doesn't make me a victim. A victim would have killed herself already from what I've been through the last three years. That makes me a survivor and proud to be in a country where the possibility exists of surviving a deadly disease, of having a woman president, of having a black president, of rising out of poverty to have a meaningful life, and of having the freedom to write on this blog.

Guys, have a good rest. It's been a privilege to blog with you.

(Smarternu, what's wrong? Where are you? It's your freedom and right to speak but we'd just prefer you'd turn your anger into wit. As Genesis sings, "Turn It on Again"! Oh, let me guess ... they're men so you hate them, too.)

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

OldDemo — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:37:58 GMT

I've been a Democrat for over 4 decades and pride myself on keeping abreast of the issues (a throw back to years as a military intelligence officer - I need the real story). Like Obama, I strongly and vocally opposed military action in Iraq from 2001 to the present. But I was not in Congress and neither was Obama. Senator Clinton was. And she was one of two Senators from New York. I watched at the time as millions of Americans (you know who you are) emailed or phoned their Reps in Washington to go after Osama bin Laden and all the terrorists responsible for 9/11. How could anyone expect her to have voted any differently on the War Powers Act and then have faced her NY constituents at that time - many who lived in New York City and had lost loved ones in the Trade Towers - and told them that she didn't want to give our "beloved, Mr. Christian" president the power to wage war on our enemies? If she had, she would have been villafied as one of those horrible, liberal Democrats that couldn't even come together with the Republican Majority at a time of crisis. You get the picture. Now Obama plays on the short memories of older folks and lack of experience in first-time young voters to criticize Senator Clinton for representing the people of New York. Wonder what he would have done in her position! That's kind of the general point of the 3:00am commercial. At that time of night, you don't get to ask your advisors, you don't get to have a cup or 2 of coffee to wake up so you can think clearly - you just react - based on your real world experience, not homework problems from college books. Obama's campaign is reverting to their real selves - childish amateurs in a grown-up world where complex problems must often be dealt with quickly, decisively and with a maturity that only comes with pain, mistakes and hard work. Obama needs 8-10 more years of elected public service before he's paid his dues and then his campaign staff should be mature enough to avoid putting their boss's foot in their mouths.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

OldDemo — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:38:01 GMT

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

blueskykt — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:42:09 GMT

I wonder if Ms. Powers is just a willing sacrificial lamb. Perhaps her remark was deliberate and planned; get the word out there and broadcast it and get other people saying it. Then pretend to be sorry and resign.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

blueskykt — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:47:38 GMT

Re: comment by OldDemo

Thank you for articulating so well my thoughts, particularly the fact that Obama's so-called courage in opposing the war was no more courageous than that of any ordinary citizen. He risked nothing.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

simmer — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:54:37 GMT

I love your rationalization. Let's see if I've got this right... "Infrahumanization" as you call it, is "not limited to the close-minded and the bigoted" but is "universal" -- apparently all people are incapable of resisting it. How else could it be explained that the two contenders for the Democrat Party nomination are engaging in such voracious cross-infrahumanization? As democrats and liberals, they could never be close-minded or bigoted, only Republicans can behave like that, right? I sincerely doubt all people are compelled to behave as you suggest. Only the close-minded, bigoted zealots in both parties feel the need to demonize and dehumanize the opposition (sorry, your new word just doesn't resonate with me).

As for what's wrong with political newbies spouting off - just remember 12 months from now those same neophytes may be running our country. We will get to enjoy four years of on-the-job training incompetence just like the Carter administration (interest rates at 21%, mortgages at 15%, unemployment over 10% - what fun!) But then we survived the first round of the Clinton newbies with all their miscues and screwups, so who knows, maybe we'll get lucky again. Now the Clintons are the old masters of the game, in every cynical and malevolent respect. Or, we could vote for the really old hand, who will probably fill his administration with retreads from Reagan and Bush administrations. Sigh, isn't there another choice?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

BMagsNY — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:58:48 GMT

Of course she is a MONSTER!!! Only a monster would defend a child rapist in court and tear down a 12 year old girl on the stand. Accusing her of pursuing older men and basically saying she wanted it and asked for it. Only a monster would defend so aggressively the Thomas Taylor case just to impress the bar and gain attention of other male lawyers. Article in Newsday... check it out. Thomas Taylor- child rapist- google him

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

BMagsNY — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 05:00:03 GMT

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

OldDemo — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 05:09:34 GMT

I'm also at a loss as to why people are so polorized about Senator Clinton that there are those that could even take this stupid comment seriously. You want to talk cheap campaign tricks? Obama wasn't even a major blip on the radar until he got Oprah to campaign for him. As usual, the masses of air-head Americans who swoon over anything with Oprah's approval on it, dutifully saw Obama as the next big thing. Except for one problem - four years ago, Oprah was stumping for . . . George W. Bush. Which brings up the question, Is Oprah a Republican (she's rich so could be) or is she a Born Again Democrat? She's already proved once she can pick a loser - are Democrats so mindless that they'll still let an entertainer influence their candidate for the most important job on the planet??? And who threw the first dirt? How about that nasty crack Obama made when someone asked him if he liked Hillary's outfit. He answered in an unmistakably snide way "It's okay - I guess". At worst this was plain old nasty - at best he seems indecisive about the simplest question. Do you like it or not? Yes. No. Pick one. End of question. President Obama - it's 3am. We're being attacked by _____. Do we launch our missiles? "It's ok I guess". By the way, for those who claim this is fear mongering, guess what. It's happened already and more than once. Again, this is when you really want experience. (Can you imagine if it had happened while Bush #2 was (is) at the helm.)

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

col55 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 05:14:13 GMT

Hillary Clinton is a MONSTER.

She will say anything, do anything to win this race. She will try to destroy the most unifying and charismatic candidate this country has seen in the last 20+ years...and she will take down her party to go for a win. Her tactics are transparent - she would rather see McCain win this year than Obama so that she can then run in 2012. She has no ethics, no morals. She has a new personality every week. She has now come completely unhinged in the face of her declining chances.

As Larry David asks - Do you want that nut answering the phone at 3AM (or 3PM)?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

col55 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 05:24:11 GMT

OldDemo - I am hoping your pondering "I'm also at a loss as to why people are so polorized about Senator Clinton..." is in jest...or you are seriously confirming to most of us that there is not a rational bone left in the average Hillary supporter.

In case you were serious...we just don't like nasty...that is why most people despise her.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Monster — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 05:49:49 GMT

I'm on the side of the Monster, who will fight to get what we all need. Go Hillary. from your Monster Fan

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

gotmycoffee — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 05:52:54 GMT

The problem with the comment is..... absolutely nothing. Hillary and her camp have made statements that should be considered far worse and will go to any lengths in order to secure a bid at the Presidency. Not that she really wants the"Presidency" as such, but wants to become the first women President and make/leave her mark in history. That's her focus.

She's a master of tranference; flailing, yelling, screaming anything that takes the focus off her and puts it on her opponent. She doesn't want to / won't release her tax forms so she accuses Barack of not releasing his relationship with an acquaintance currently in the court system. Now she is flanked by two black body guards, who just happened to "appear" over the past week..... the week in question when she turned dirty and started to "appear" as though she's right for a certain group.

Anyone writer knows that you "write" to a sixth grade level in order to reach the majority of the population....... problem is, tell a sixth grader you'll bring them candy and they could really care less how you're going to go about getting that candy........ just hearing they're going to get it is enough. Hillary says she'll take care of health care and the economy and the war, and, and, and but has never said how she plans on doing so. The population this week fell in line, hook line and sinker....... didn't even think far enough to get past the offer of candy!

The Cl

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

marbay — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 05:54:53 GMT

The truth is the truth. HRC will do anything to win. She does not care about her party or the American people, she is obssessed with power. History has shown that power can lead to dangerous things with the Clintons-Whitewater, Arkansas troopergate, travelgate, Monica,Paula Jones,ETC. Why has no one reported that in Hillary's last Senate race she lied about her campaign finances and got in trouble? Go to Hillcap.org or peterpaul.She also has a different personality every hour. Hillary has so many skeletons in her closet that Obama could easily win the election if he used them. Yet he is running an honorable campaign and I admire and respect him. He is being pounded by the press, Clinton and McCain and he still keeps his composure and strength. GO OBAMA GO. OUR COUNTRY NEEDS YOU1

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

gotmycoffee — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 05:57:00 GMT

Has anyone ever noticed that all HIllary does is tell us what her opponents are saying.......... let them speak for themselves Hillary and you tell us what YOU plan on doing. Oh, that's right............ YOU don't HAVE a plan! You AREN't fiscally responsible; blowing through two times the money with far less to show............ it's disgusting that people can't see through the obvious! She's reportedly in her "comfort zone"...... playing dirty......... What a President that would make........

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Republicrat — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 05:57:56 GMT

The easy solution to the fla. and MI dilemma is to allocate the assigned delegates according to each candidates percentage of attained popular vote,then seat the delgations. The only losers would be the MI and FL voters who are deprived of a experiencing of OBAMA-MANIA; but then close to 30M Dollars would be saved. The candidates can make a few visits before the convention to each state in June.

An even better way to allocate the delgates would be to look at each state as a percentage of the Electoral College, and then allocate the delegates according to that formula. If each contest were winner take all like the Electoral College Clinton is currently ahead because she has won bigger states. Finally, the party could allocate 1/2 by te EC method and 1/2 by the poplar vote method. These are FAIR and Save 30M dollars which can be used in November.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

marbay — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 05:57:57 GMT

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Republicrat — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 06:05:38 GMT

I'd like to see OBAMA EARN the nomination. He hasnt won any big states, nor many swing states. And NO Boorder States. His delegate lead all comes from only 200k votes in caucus states that dems wont win any way. he couldnt win MA nor AZ when he had their governors support. He barely won Missouri with their Governors support. When you havent won ANY of the 10 largest states, you have pretty thin support. This is too important to be McGoverned or Dukakis'sd out of the White House.

We may have to do PR, MI, FL in a winner take all contest.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

okiedo — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 06:14:18 GMT

Andy Please clairifly you last writting [The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark] that Powers was asked to leave because of the Monster remark or was it the remark that really got her in trouble. The "(par-phase) oh when he (obama) says that 17months we will be of Iraqi depends how he feels in January O9" remark. You could have noted that it was both. Or reported that it was the "Monster" but not the latter. It wouldnt be so bad if Obama wasnt on Hillary's back to commit to a time line --which eveyone know is stupit. However, you didnt mention it at all.

in the words of Bill..."Shame on you"....

you were so close though

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

okiedo — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 06:28:55 GMT

After reading some of these it seems ol' Hill got the Obamastarbuckins LEFTY nuts in a bunch.

With all the EDU and you all can’t see behind the hate you have for her is making you are following a carpetbagger

Remember the star wars it the hate that turns you to the dark side

He has played you all

Get some street willya

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Illinoisgirl — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 06:39:59 GMT

Today is Women's Day and the entire world celebrates women's achievement while in America Hillary haters continue to pound on Hillary calling her a monster. Don't worry, Obamans, we are committed to the future of this country, and Hillary just happens to be our candidate of choice at this time. We have taken a lot of abuse while in the campaign trail but we have to keep our silence because we are not monsters. We do not want to be like the people we are fighting against. Yes, we all agree that Obama is charismatic, so were a lot of Evangelists in the past who turned out to be crooks. We value our votes, not to gamble it because somebody promises change. Listen to the speeches of past candidates. Wasn't BUsh supposed to be the unifier also? Did not Kerry promise that there will be no blue states or red states but one united states of America. Was not America screaming "Enough with Bush?" I don't know if any of the Obama supportes realize that when the media announce that Hillary won Texas, the same day the dollar got stronger. We are not electing a president of the United States but a Leader of the entire world. Why do Obama feel so righteous? I belong to a group of 24 Illinoisans, all profressions, ages ranging from 23-65, all professionals or retirees. We don't have time for dreams or rhetorics. And we have seen a lot of changes, some for the better, some for the worse. I really would like to hear Obamans say they support him because they believe in his accomplishments, not what he promises, and absolutely not because they hate Hillary! It boggles my mind that people believe that Obama is spotless! Did he live in a bubble? Or is he the Messiah. He accused Clinton campaign of insulting him by using his middle name. You say a name is just a name? Well, you don't know Islam! My first husband was a Muslim and part of the ceremony was to give me a Muslim name. When my son embraced the Catholic faith, he dropped his Muslim name and took a Christian name which I believe is symbolic of your faith. Well, in my opinion, it is a more complicated scenario for Obama because his mother was an agnostic and his stepfather was a fundamenlist Muslim (Indonesian). He barely knew his father who left him and returned to Kenya after getting his degree from Harvard when Obama Jr was a child. He was raised by his Caucasian grandparents yet it's his Kenyan relatives who are so involved in his candidacy right now. IN his book "Dreams from my Father" Sen Obama was supposed to have written "I find solace in nursing my pervasive grievance and animosity towards my mother's race. Don't you think our media and the Republicans are aware of his link with the oppositionists in Kenya? Are you aware of what's going on in Kenya. Kenya is dominantly Christians at this time but the opposition want to make it into a Jihadi Muslim State. Just remember, no one is sleaze-proof. This will all come out at the November elections should Obama win. We support Hillary for our country, this is not a personality contest. We are talking about major problems. I have lived in Iran, Egypt, England, and I am sending this email from southern Philippines where people have to deal with terrosism every day. We have a big Muslim population in this state. This is reputed to be one of the training grounds of Muslim terrorists. I am not accusing Sen Obama of anything, all I am saying is asking his supporters if they really believe he is who he says he is! By the way, in one of the precincts in Fort Worth, the precinct captain rounded up the number of delegates which was 3.55 Hillary 4.47 Obama to 3 Hillary 5 Obama! When one of our watched pointed out the mathematical error, she was shushed and told she can't say anything because she is just an observer. She was not campaigning! she was speaking as a citizen of this country on a mathematical issue. We know what goes on in this caucuses. Caucuses disenfranchises a lot of the elderly and those who have to work during caucus wime which is only 1 hr. So, please, do not make your conclusions about the results of the caucus against the results of the primaries. I was in Iowa and where it was bitterly cold on the night of the caucus so that the elderly could not come to the caucus. So, Obamans, think about your grandparents and have a little respect for them.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

bigboy8836 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 06:55:41 GMT

GO HILLARY GO! TAKE IT ALL THE WAY TO DENVER!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Kay Kay — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:27:09 GMT

Hillary may have turned the press on Obama, but her campaign seems to be okay with winning the battle with no concern for the war. I'm so frustrated because while I wouldn't mind seeing her win, if she win's this way, she loses the general election. I hope all those people who think they're helping Hillary with their vicious posts would Stop Helping. The polls show it. If she loses those new party participants, she loses the general election. And the press loves a horse race, so they keep pulling these stories to the top instead of anything that actually matters. Hillary people, you are hurting your own cause.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

a brighter America 08 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:42:41 GMT

Hillary is not representative of the quality of individual we would like to see as President of the United States. She has already PROVEN she is NOT electible. Take a close look at how she has run her campaign---chaotic, lots of infighting, loose tongues and diarrhea of the mouth of her campaign people, most of all Bill Clinton, discord among her campaign people, unable to budget wisely, slash-and-burn tactics, playing the poor-me card, gender fetching, race baiting, deriding the smaller states and caucus states as unimportant and as not mattering, decrying those who do not vote for her as if they don't matter, just a bunch of dumb people. She really insulted 49 states when she said she would be President because the people in Ohio said they wanted her to be President, and on and on. That woman has an overinflated ego and an obsessive hunger for power. She definitely is NOT Presidential material. I am sure there are governors out there who are 1000 times better qualified and maybe one of them will become our Vise President. Being a President's wife does NOT qualify her for the Presidency. Let's say your spouse is a heart surgeon, you have been around him when he is planning a difficult surgery; does that qualify you to perform the surgery? Maybe next time Bill Clinton has heart problems, Hillary will call on his surgeorn's wife to perform open heart surgery?? Hillary was denied any kind of Security Clearance the entire time she was in the White House. There were very valid reasons for that. Therefore, she would NOT be privy to any kind of foreign policy; thus, her claims of foreign policy experience is bogus. Just like her 35 years experience. The ONLY government office she has held is her SIX years and one year in the US Senate as the Senator of New York. Ask any New Yorker what Hillary has done for that state besides naming postoffices, libraries, and courthouses, and shaking athletes hands and attending funerals. They will tell you she has done NOTHING for the state of New York. Her senate record is meager; ONLY 20 legislative bills, including the above mentioned. So, she has grossly inflated her legislative experience. About time people wake up and see Hillary for her lies and deceit to this nation. She certainly is NOT worthy of the highest offfice in our land.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

a brighter America 08 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 08:00:09 GMT

EHillary is not representative of the quality of individual we would like to see as

President of the United States. She has already PROVEN she is NOT electible.

Take a close look at how she has run her campaign---chaotic, lots of infighting,

loose tongues and diarrhea of the mouth of her campaign people, most of all

Bill Clinton, discord among her campaign people, unable to budget wisely,

slash-and-burn tactics, playing the poor-me card, gender fetching, race baiting,

deriding the smaller states and caucus states as unimportant and as not mattering,

decrying those who do not vote for her as if they don't matter, just a bunch of

dumb people. She really insulted 49 states when she said she would be

President because the people in Ohio said they wanted her to be President, and

on and on. That woman has an overinflated ego and an obsessive hunger for

power. She definitely is NOT Presidential material. I am sure there are

governors out there who are 1000 times better qualified and maybe one of them

will become our Vise President. Being a President's wife does NOT qualify her

for the Presidency. Let's say your spouse is a heart surgeon, you have been

around him when he is planning a difficult surgery; does that qualify you to

perform the surgery? Maybe next time Bill Clinton has heart problems, Hillary

will call on his surgeorn's wife to perform open heart surgery?? Hillary was

denied any kind of Security Clearance the entire time she was in the

White House. There were very valid reasons for that. Therefore, she would

NOT be privy to any kind of foreign policy; thus, her claims of foreign policy

experience is bogus. Just like her 35 years experience. The ONLY government

office she has held is her SIX years and one year in the US Senate as Senator of

New York. Ask any New Yorker what Hillary has done for that state besides

naming postoffices, libraries, and courthouses, and shaking athletes hands and

attending funerals. They will tell you she has done NOTHING for the state of

New York. Her senate record is meager; ONLY 20 legislative bills, including the

above mentioned. So, she has grossly inflated her legislative experience.

About time people wake up and see Hillary for her lies and deceit to this nation.

She certainly is NOT worthy of the highest offfice in our land.

nter Your Comment

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

a brighter America 08 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 08:08:50 GMT

"Senator Clinton has based her campaign on erroneous claims to greater and inflated

legislative and administrative experience. Former President Clinton talks up her role in

his administration on the campaign trail but pointedly refuses to release any documents

that would provide greater details on her actual activities there. It is broadly understood

that Hillary spearheaded the response team that staved off Republican attacks and she

spun the many scandals of the Clinton years. As to her Senate record, no one in the

press has had the diligence to lay out her record for the public to assess.

Senator Clinton, who has served only one full term (6yrs.), 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 website of the

Library of Congress (www.thomas.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 Jonn 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 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 facts 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),

**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 he entered 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 the spin meisters and mindless twits. I challenge Clinton

supporters to name a single legislative accomplishment that demonstrates her

self-proclaimed superior experience."

Posted by: Mark |

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

a brighter America 08 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 08:21:32 GMT

Senator Clinton, who has served only one full term (6yrs.), 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 website of the Library of Congress (www.thomas.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 Jonn 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 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 facts 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),

**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.

Posted by: Mark |

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

a brighter America 08 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 09:07:40 GMT

Why do the Clintonistas keep saying a Hillary/Obama ticket? Hillary is NOT going

to win the nomination. Senator Obama is far ahead on all counts, there is no

catching up by Clinton. IF she forces herself into it by deceptive and illegal methods,

she will lose to McCain in the general election. Her self-proclaimed "35 years of

experience", her bogus "foreign policy experience" and her bogus "legislative

experience" will be flushed down the toilet by Senator McCain. He has been in

the U.S. Senate for 20+ years. She would lose to McCain even if she won the

nomination legally. I just do NOT see her winning the nomination. The math

speaks for itself. There will be NO Hillary/Obama ticket period! Nor will there be an

Obama/Hilllary ticket. She's killed herself there with her dirty tactics and slander.

Besides, she has NO integrity, is dishonest, destructive, unstable (the many faces of

Hillary and the ever-changing personas), cannot manage her campaign, her budget,

or her teams---they all seem to suffer from a severe case of diarrhea of the mouth,

Bill Clinton has it the worst! She has no control over her anger (nor does Bill), she

waves her arms like a batteried robot (embarrassing really). She lacks steadiness

and cohesiveness, is a big liar, and, yes, she is a two-headed monster! NO ONE

would want her for VP. The Majority of America does not want her period.

Remember she said Ohio wants her to be President!! I call that total

desperation. She's already forgotten ALL the other states that have voted!!

Guess she suffers from a bit of dementia??

We need to say good riddance to Clintonism and their dirty political games!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

kpcakes — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 09:10:41 GMT

If you want to know the TRUTH of how either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama ACTUALLY voted and bills they have authored you can go directly to www.opencongress.org and see for yourself. I sense a bit of "infrahumanizing" in post from 'a brighter America 08'.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

a brighter America 08 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 09:16:41 GMT

Andrew, if you feel Obama's people have trouble keeping their "gubs shut", what's your

take on the Hillary, her campaign team members, surrogates (Johnson, Coumo for

example) and Bills endless putdowns of Senator Obama, their slander, their race-baiting,

their gender cards, and slash-and-burn tactics? I call it severe cases of diarrhia of the

mouth; Bill Clinton has a deadly case of diarrhea of the mouth and an uncontrollable

hot temper. Guess HIllary put a leash on him lately, but he still spews garbage just like

the rest of the Clinton camp. You know, Andrew, the Clintons are really bad for America

and we, the people, need to bid good riddance to Clintonism once and for all.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

a brighter America 08 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 09:37:41 GMT

Senator Clinton, who has served only one full term (6yrs.), 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 website of the Library of Congress (www.thomas.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 Jonn 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 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 facts 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),

**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.

Posted by: Mark |

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Hermana — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 09:52:09 GMT

As an American diplomat, I caution everyone about putting much stock in the Candian's consulate's memo. As I understand it, the conversation took place during a tour of the consulate. This means that the inexperienced junior officer who wrote the memo (and those are the folks tasked with writing such reports) did not follow along taking notes as the Consul General and Mr. Goolsbee talked. The junior officer had to reconstruct the conversation, which he was not a part of, but only a listener. Besides the memore issue, you have other problems. The offending quote was inthe introduction. The introduction of these reports are summaries which contain the essense of the message, including analysis that tries to capture what is most important to the home government. So, it is the consulate's spin on whatevr took place. It is also important to note that Candian consulates inthe U.S. are not sonstituent posts like our consulates and their Consul Generals are not under the Ambassador inthe capital city. They are more likely than not to be political appointees rather than the career diplomats who generally head U.S. consualtes overseas. So, after this poor junior officer has written his report, and it goes through how many layers of editing by his bosses, it ends up on the desk of the CG, who is probably a former politician of the ruling party or a major contributor of the ruling government. That individual adds his own spin. So, let's all take this memo as the grain of salt it is and not the gospel truth some may wish for their own political purposes.

I say this as someone who has served our own country for more than 20 years in diplomacy.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Redonda — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 10:10:20 GMT

Senator Clinton's campaign knew that the story which was put out about Senator Obama and his alleged damagremarks were false yet she and her campaign went to the public and in my mind deliberately distorted ? no lied to the public. that was a dastardly act .Indeed she is a monster.

what is the record of her experience. Experience doing what. The press has let her off the hook .

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

sara48909 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 11:01:12 GMT

Mark, while Obama may have authored or co-sponsored 500* bills, only #, yes thats right THREE bill passed. So while anyone can introduce legislation and many do, unless you can get your legislation passed and signed into law it means nothing. In fact it means less then nothing because it is proof of how ineffectual the Senator has been.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

sara48909 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 11:07:29 GMT

In addition, I find the Obama campaign as well as th Obama supporters hypocrisy makes me nauseous. Obama, his campaign directors, and his supporters have been ranting for the past month that Clinton will say anything to get elected. Well I guess its pretty obvious that Sen Obama IS saying anything to get elected. When he stands at a podium in Ohio saying he will overturn NAFTA, while his advisors are telling Canada that he intends nothing of the sort ot becomes obvious that this "CHANGE" of which he speaks is nothing but political maneuvering.

This is what happens when journalists start doing their job and focus on both candidates instead of only one candidate. It is truly amazing the things that can be discovered when investigative journalists actually do some investigating.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Benz13 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 12:15:37 GMT

Sound like...Redonda...like Bin Obama has an agenda of his own.

The real Monster is in the White House!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Interested! — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:21:42 GMT

It all boils down to if we want the first woman president or the first black presient. The sexists and racial remarks are proving yet again, this nation is bigoted and sexists. What secured my vote was when Michelle Obama made her comment concerning Hillary standing with her husband. She went against many of us that have done the same thing, in many cases keeping the family together instead of splitting it up. When we stand before God and promise to stand as one, in good times and in bad times, it includes evrerything. Michelle doesn't seem to feel this way. This nation does NOT need anymore divisiveness. In our family, home or in DC. End of Story. I am proud that Hillary takes her vows before Go seriously. I did the same and I had a good husband. Forgiveness is Gods way. It is my way. At times it is a struggle but with Gods help, we make it. Michelle needs to practice forgiveness instead of criticism. It would make her a better person.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

vtcallan — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:32:04 GMT

If the Dems cannot remove their heads from their asses we will ensure that the Republicans have four more years. Look: 1. Clinton has deserved to stay in the race at least until PA. 2. Obama supporters are not deluded and naive (they are inspired though) 3. Clinton supporters really DO think that she has more experience (I don't agree but at least they are sincere) 4. We need to swallow our pride and get behind whomever becomes the nominee. 5. We are all just a wee bit too emotional here. 6. Any democrat is better that McBush. 7. The superdelegates will choose this nominee (it better be the one with the lead in pledged delegates/popular vote. 8. If one candidate has the popular vote lead and the other leads in pledged delegates, this is enough of a tie that the voters should be willing to vote for whomever the superdelegates choose. 9. Remember, John McCain is getting a free-ride (albeit with little press) 10. Let this thing play out with as little emotional back-biting as possible.....it just hurts the party.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

visionseer — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:34:53 GMT

Seems like Hillary's whining and crocodile tears has worked. The media has went negative on Obama. The media was doing it right before by exposing Hillary as she is. Hillary will do anything to get elected. Even jumping on Bush and MCcain's band wagon. Why isn't the media reporting the Clinton campaign meeting with the Canadians on NAFTA?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

sara48909 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:44:21 GMT

Interested, I agree completely. Jesus in his own words proclaimed that there is no divorce. That a man or woman who divorces forces their spouse to commit adultery. When a person marries they give their oath before God that they will stay married to this person for better or worse, in good times or bad, in sickness or in health til DEATH DO YOU PART. I have been married for 43 years. My husband has not been faithful to me the entire time, but we have four children. And I would not deprive them of their father because of my hurt pride. I gave God MY oath that I would stay with this man until one of us died. Hillary has my respect and admiration because even though she was humiliated before the whole world she chose to stay in her marriage and keep her oath. If a spouse or child was being physically or sexually abused that is another story completely and then I believe divorce is a necessity. But there are too many people today who in their selfishness and self-centeredness cause their families too much pain because they refuse to work at their marriages. They would rather walk away no matter how much damage it does to their children. I will always admire Hillary Clinton for her courage and strength and faith. It is truly a shame that these evangelical Christians who talk so much about the Bible being the word of God yet condemn a woman who followed the words of Our Lord.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

visionseer — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:44:35 GMT

Everyone had better take heed to the Word of God. A woman is not supposed to be in leadership.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

sara48909 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:53:36 GMT

Visionseer, In the bible women were disciples. Women were also deaconesses. Mary of Magdala was called the Apostle to the Apostles because Jesus chose to appear to her before he appeared to any other Apostle. Paul said women were supposed to be subordinate. Jesus did not, nor any of the Apostles. Paul never heard Jesus preach. Paul made his comments based on the teachings of the Jewish Synogogue, not Christian teachings.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Hermana — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:56:44 GMT

Sara48909,

Canadian PM Harper's Chief of Staff Ian Brodie said that the Clinton campaign contacted the Candian Embassy in Washington to let them know that her words on NAFTA should be taken with a grain of salt. Brodie is a pretty high level source. Why aren't you concerned that Clinton is saying one thing to voters and something else to other countries?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

fasher — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 14:24:39 GMT

Politics and Religion, Not a good combination.

As for the "Monster" remark. This is hardly news to anyone. Clinton is the most vile, political machine in Washington.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

2468 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 14:29:25 GMT

Visionseer, get real! Did you miss the part in the Bible that says it's also okay to sell your daughters into slavery and stone your neighbors to death? I think I'll pass on at least 'some' of the so-called word of God.

There are plenty of female leaders out there that do great jobs. Without having testosterone to get in the way, I actually think women in general make better leaders and can negotiate better. But that aside, people seem to miss the part about Obama and Clinton being very similar on most issues, and comes down to a lot of personal attacks. Many are still using the old double standards - Clinton's called a Bitc* and other things for being assertive or aggressive, but yet Obama is simply considered assertive or aggressive.

And why does Obama NOW care about the Clinton tax returns when for the longest time he didn't and simple said it was a matter of choice? Why is it now that she's trying to hide something and not be transparent?"

Me - who CARES about the Clinton tax returns! If the IRS thinks they're okay, and the gov't isn't looking at the returns and investing fraud, then I don't need to see them How much they make is personal and TOTALLY UNRELATED as to whether someone can run the country. People are just want to be NOSY - and just won't admit it.

I'm all for people supporting each candidate, and don't think Obama supporters are automatically stupid, but come one - how about we stop using old double standards and focus on actual relevant information that matters - not tax returns and stuff like that. People need to stop being quite so emotional and be a little bit more objective - and fair.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

timrogers — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 14:41:13 GMT

Of course both campaigns realize that NAFTA is a hot issue in the upper midwest where it has caused job loss. Of course both campaigns realize that NAFTA has caused job gains in other parts of the country. Some aspects of any trade agreement are always subject to renegotiation as circumstances change, and the political winds shift. It is sad to see the political debate focus on who said what sound bites intead of the actual features of NAFTA that should be revised. Both sides in this contest know that a good sound bite beats a good idea every time.Can any political race be otherwise?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Karenn1 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 14:49:10 GMT

I CARE, Clinton tax return if hideing something,can be used against her by this present adminstration. That is the danger of not clearing this issue.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

cinnapatch — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 14:56:31 GMT

Talking about NAFTA and Canada--I didn't realize until this latest flap that Canada is the largest exporter of oil to the US. Larger than Saudi Arabia--think about it.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

sara48909 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 14:58:12 GMT

Hermana, the PM of Canada did not write the memo. The memo was posted and it said Obama, NOT Clinton. The Pm is a conservative and buddy of Bush. I don't find it surprising at all that he would say anything about Clinton.

Karenn1. Clinton's tax return isn't due until APril 15th. This is one of the reasons why it hasn't been published yet. Her accountants won't have it done until April.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

joniross5 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 14:58:22 GMT

I agree 100% with the person who called Billary a monster since it's true. I may also add that she is schizophrenic. I am a white woman and I can see the signs of menopause, hot flashes and odd behavior every time I see Hillary.

Do we want a woman like that for our President? I don't think so!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

kindli — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 14:59:19 GMT

sara - I'd just like to agree with what you said about the bible. Paul wasn't wrong in what he was preaching, if he was promoting the Jewish faith without Jesus included. Many people forget that or just overlook it because it meshes with their worldview and who wants to change when they don't have to? Unfortunately, many of the future leaders didn't even worry about correcting it, because it made it simpler to remain in power. Even now in our 'enlightened' society, the Christian churches prefer Paul's teachings over that of Jesus. Supposedly it helps keep harmony in the household. Better to have a clear-cut 'master of the house' than to preach about the true power of forgiveness.

Visioneer, if you want to use religion as your basis for voting - go vote on the church board and leave the political arena. Books of Faith (Bible, Koran, etc) have been used for too long as scapegoats to justify negative and destructive behavior. Don't go blaming God for your prejudice and fear.

I like how you call Hillary's tears Crocodile tears. Seems you're upset when she decides to get into what you feel is a 'mans arena' and then get upset when she behaves like a woman. How would you know if they're real or not?

As for whining. Both Hillary and Obama have been doing that. It's like having little kids in the sandbox, not wanting to share a toy. Don't get upset with one and not the other. These double standards are kind of ridiculous.

If you think she isn't the qualified to be President, then don't vote for her.

Ranting about your dislike for her gender or her public displays of emotion does little to help or hinder in the voting process. No matter who we vote into office, they're not going to be capable of fulfilling every promise they've made. That's why we have the Senate. Checks and Balances. When the Senate doesn't balance the power of the WH, we get the situation we're currently in with Bush.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

kindli — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 15:09:54 GMT

NAFTA was good in theory, but not so good in reality. Hopefully once we've determined a candidate, they will listen to the people and make some headway in making the necessary changes. There are good points to it, but it needs to be changed to return to us, the working class of America, what we lost.

What we as voters need to do is to determine which candidate is more likely to make those changes. They both talk a good game, but which one is more likely to stick with it.

So far Obama has talked a good game, and as one of the others stated, he's been 'present' for a lot of important bills, but I haven't seen a lot of proof of his actual stance - his actually voting one way or the other. Hillary at least makes a vote yes or no. She's sometimes wrong, but she appears to learn from those lessons.

We should really be looking at our candidates as leader potential. In the long run, that's all that matters. Not their desire for power, or change, or to be the first this or that, but whether they're strong enough to take a stance, and strong enough to correct their stance if it turns out their first chouce was wrong. Our current President acknowledges no mistakes and continues on in one direction. I know that I don't want another President who'll be the same way.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

LukeM42 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 15:18:58 GMT

I think the real problem with the monster comment is the fact that all these "slips" are making Obama look like a total newb,

When Sen Clinton 's campaign was low on cash everyone questioned her ability to run the country.

I think it's clear now that contributers were only waiting to see if she really had a shot, her campaign seem to be running quite qell now.

Looking at Sen Obama's campaign, and the way his staffers are slipping up so often, I question how he would run the country.

Look, you know and I know Obama would make an excellent prez, when he's ready. I think Obama hasn't quite figgured out how to maintain his almost "second comming" like presence, and at the same time fight for his beliefs.

The change Obama wants to bring cannot happen over night. What's he gonna do first day as prez? Walk in and fire everyone and bring in his own staff? Hope it's not the same bunch that keeps goofing up like this.

A Clinton Obama ticket in Nov guarentees the democrats are in control of the Whitehouse next year. Sen Clinton would also lay the ground work for the kind of change Obama wants. Paving the way for Obama in 4 to 8 years.

Rather than trying to change the tires while the car is moving.

My biggest fear is that Mcain will lose his temper durring a debate and Obama will crumble.

Then even if he wins in nov, he's not going to command the same respect on the world stage that he would have if everone was a little bit scared of him.

I also think Sen Clinton would tear Mcain a new one in a debate.

Look, it's impossible to rise high enough in the political heierarchy(so what if I can;t spell) without accumulating skelletons in your closet. It's a simple fact. They all have secrets and have done dirty deals on the road to where they are.

I think Sen Clinton is the one who is best able to clean this mess up. Obama in 4 to 8 years.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

tjirish34 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 15:20:38 GMT

while monster comment were ill advised. In a nutshell Power's meaning behind comment is in effect true. No, Hillary not a monster but her campaign tactics are out of the RNC playbook. Willie Horton, swiftboating, fear mongering over the last several years over 9/11. Where are the color coded warnings? Now the 3AM Ad. Which is soo tied into above mentioned RNC tactics. 3AM not 11PM?? I got a Hillary AD: "It's 3AM does Hillary know where Bill is?" There is alot of ammo for a negative attack on Hillary. Obama is not holding back because he doesn't know how to throw punches. He is holding back because that is whole message about his campaign. Change from this BS. Hillary found a way to stop Obama MO. That was to go totally negative on him. Already a joke about "going all Hillary" on someone. She is trying to make case that it shows how tough she is and a fighter etc... BUT I disagree. It shows how bad she wants that whitehouse bid and she will do whatever it takes. Well that's fine against a GOP candisate like Bush. But Obama is a fellow Democrat and he has energized alot of young voters. I hope that her tactics end up hurting her in long run. BTW I am in Indiana and still get to vote for Obama. Media can play this out but fact remains if Obama leads in pledged delegates at covention. Hillary is dreaming if she thinks she will get the Super Delegates to support her. I would argue that Obama has a decent argument he could threaten to leave party and start a 3rd party. A dream of alot of voters for years. Now would that happen? Doubtful but my point is Obama has cards to play.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hotstuff — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 15:31:15 GMT

Samantha Power is absolutely right about Hillary the Monster!! She (Samantha) was only reiterating what everything already knows but was not willing to say out loud! She was only calling

a spade a spade!!

Her only mistake (if any) was the fact that she didn´t say it DIPLOMATICALLY! But then, Hillary does not believe in courtesy and as such does not deserve any!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

susangg — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 15:45:35 GMT

Obama's campaign needs a bit more hierarchical structure. Obama and his campaign staff need to carefully vet and designate a core group who are permitted to speak on behalf of the candidate and everybody else told to refrain from doing so. Its fine if local organizers are interviewed about their campaign efforts but they cannot be permitted to issue policy statements. And its fine for Obama to utilize the services of "unofficial" advisers who are experts in their fields - like Samathana Power was - but those kinds of "advisers" cannot be permitted to speak to the press. Their job is to educate the candidate, not to speak for him.

ALSO: Obama needs to get himself one of those expert "unofficial" adviserse QUICK to educate him about Latin America. He made a major error "me tooing" Hillary's "me too" of the crap coming out of the White House about the recent South American fiasco. He needs to be educated on the fact that Uribe is a narco-president with a sordid record, and that his invasion of Ecuador was both unwarranted and a serious violation of international law. We expect cheerleading from Hillary - she's always been a warmonger especially when it comes to Latin America, but Obama needs to educate himself a bit better on Latim American issues. We, his supporters, expect better of him.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hotstuff — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 15:51:07 GMT

To "Smarternu":

I have read all your garbage here. The more you write, the more it´s obvious that

you need a mental check -up! You know, like attracts like!!

You reflect the same qualities of Hillary that all decent, enlightened folks detest.

I won´t even waste my time trying to shoot holes into your mindless regurgitations. Stay

with your Hillary and leave the rest of us to support OBAMA!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

booksndogs — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 15:54:33 GMT

>>>The unfortunate part is that while a Clinton staffer may have indeed originally told Canadian officials to take HER words with a "grain of salt"--as the initial leaker said--somehow the Canadian press started digging in Obama's sandbox. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT HAPPENED>>> (emphasis added)

But *that* is the real story here. HOW it happened is that someone, with "malice aforethought" and with high enough ranking to be credited, told CTV that "a high-level Obama staffer called Ambassador Michael Wilson to warn him that Obama's statements would only be 'campaign rhetoric'". Without that "teaser" there would have been no story; Goolsbee's comments aren't that damning on their own as he only reiterates that Obama is not protectionist - which he is not. Ian Brodie has been identified, at least by ABC, as the person who gave the original leak, and Ian Brodie is the one identified by the reporters as saying Clinton people had made the initial report. So WHAT HAPPENED to get that false story, with made-up details, to CTV and make it so credible that they would run with it? That's the story here.

Why is no journalist (or government official, for that matter) focusing on that one critical - and telling - fact?

As to your cental thesis, there is one factor you may be overlooking. I've watched political campaigns for more than 40 years. The *squawking* that is coming from the Clinton campaign is something new, something different. Normally, neither Goolsbee's nor Rice's comments (which was a simple acknowledgement of fact: neither Obama, Clinton nor McCain have "experience" in answering that 3 a.m. phone call) would be that notable. But the Clinton campaign "squeals like a stuck pig" if the least thing is said or done .... and suddenly all these things are big issues. And the press (and public, damn them) are giving credence to it. ----- Why didn't the Obama do the same about the outright lying mailers that Clinton sent out before NH? Because normally politicians understand there is going to be roughness, and perhaps because the men (and most women politicians) don't want to be perceived as so "touch-me-not" and 'delicate.' I am a woman, of an age and race that is supposed to make me sympathize with Clinton. I don't. I think she and her campaign are playing the 'gender card' with great finess and success. Step back for a minute and think of the story you would be writing if this manufactured outrage was coming from a man's campaign, if there were daily conference calls about the latest 'naughty' thing that was done by his opponent. This does NO favor for women and their ability to be equal professionals -- in fact, it does the rest of us a great disservice. Is she going to be his easily bruised and offended if she becomes President. "Playing the victim" is a poor strategy for governance, I'd think.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hotstuff — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:00:56 GMT

TO ALL CLINTON SUPPORTERS!!!

---------------------------------------------------------------

After Billary´s "KITCHEN SINK", what next?.......

"THE SEWAGE DISPOSAL"?

Whatever it is, it looks like it´s going to STINK!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Hermana — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:03:05 GMT

Sara dear,

I know the PM of Canada did not write the memo. The memo was written by Joseph DeMora, a junior employee at the Canadian Consulate in Chicago. It was PM Harper's Chief of Staff who leaked that the Clinton campaign had told the Canadian Embasy in Washington not to worry about Hillary's NAFTA remarks.

As much as Americans like to look for U.S.-centric explanations for everything (most other countries have their own concerns), a Canadian-centric explanation makes the most sense to me. IChief of Staff Brodie screwed up and in order to protect him and divert attention fromhis screw up, the Canadian government found the report of Goolsbee's tour of the consulate and leaked that. I worked at our Embassy in Canada for several years, so this would fit right in with Candain apolitics.

In addition, memos, cables, and other diplomatic reports, expecially those that quote sources, as Mr. Goolsbee would be considered, are generally classified. If poor Mr. DeMora leaked a report on his own, he would lose his security clearance as well as his job and would probably find himself indicted. Someone way abovbe DeMora's pay grade declassified and leaked the report. I would say it would have to be the PM's office. And it worked. Who is talking about Brodie?

Luke - I disagree. Clinton is not capable of running the country. Her campaign has been a disaster. Obama won 11 in a row so handily, because the Clinton campaign did not have Plan B following February 5. So,m they were caught flat footed without full-blown operations in each state. Obama, on the other hand, has a 50-state strategy. Clinton does not even have afull slate of delegates in Pennsylvania.

We should have seen this coming. She has spent money like a drunken sailor and has depended on advisors who do not serve her well. Why did Mark Penn receive $3.8 million for the month of January (not for the entire campaign - just for January). That much money could get you a month of add buys in numerous small states or a couple of large ones. Like I said, we should have seen this coming. When she ran for re-e;lection in 2006, I wondered why she spent $30million when she was obviously going to win aqnd was running aginst a nobody. Poor management skills!!!!!

Obama, on the other hand, other than this past week, has run a brilliant campaign - losing primarily by small margins and winning by relatively large wons. Thisis the reason he has such a huge dlegate lead that she will not be able to catch. I refer you all to Slate.com's delegate calculator. Even by being extremely generous to Hillary, Obama will only need an additional 100 superdelegates to clinch this after all the voting is done. he should be able to do that easily.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hotstuff — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:16:06 GMT

To "booksndogs":

You´re absolutely correct. The Clintons are very methodical about this: They do something

nasty, then turn around and frame Obama!!

That has two "advantages" for them:

1) It distracts attention from their evil machinations

2) It portrays Obama in bad light!

That worked perfectly for them in Ohio,Texas and Rhodes Island.... Nauseating!!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

LukeM42 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:26:38 GMT

Well, with regards to the "kitchen sink" argument.

I say , better that Sen Clinton bursts Obama's "seccond comming"

image than Mcain.

Obama is ahead of his time. He want's to play by rules

no one else plays by. Though I admit they should.

And Obama has tied his own hands by running on this

"seccond comming" platform. He HAS to turn the other cheak

or he is a phoney.

Which, honestly, I am beginning to suspect anyway.

After the last debate, and the nafta scandle.

Sen Clinton saidshe supports nafta but wants to renegotiate

some aspects of it.

Opting out of nafts would be a last resort.

Sen Obama said publicly on the debate, while pounding his fist ,

that he would use the "hammer" of opting out of nafta to

renegotiate nafta.

At the same time his advisors are telling the other countries

involved not to take it seriously.

puhleeeze

As if the canadian or mexican governments

believed his performance anyway.

I'm sure in a political sense , it could be though of as just being polite.

But at the end of the day it was a newb mistake.

Obama is not ready yet.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Hermana — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:33:01 GMT

Luke,

Clinton's poor management of her campaign shows experience? Please read my post.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

MichaelChima — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:35:15 GMT

I suspect that Samantha Power made the offensive remarks for sensational motives to cause controversy and draw more public attention to her new book " Chasing the Flame: Sergio Vieira de Mello and the Fight to Save the World."

She also told British journalists that she "plays basketball with George Clooney and claims that Sen. Obama sometimes text-messages her in the middle of the night."

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

LukeM42 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:57:14 GMT

Ok, lets talk about how they run their campaigns.

Clinton started out expecting to easily clinch the nomination.

And planned her campaign accordingly, probably focussing

more on the general election rather than the party nomination.

Obama came out of nowhere, with excellent public speaking

skills and a message everyone wanted to hear. Change, a

break from the old way of politics. A message of hope.

Everyone likes Obama, and what he stands for.

Looking at how Sen Clinton's campaign has adapted

to this challange, I think she has shown remarkable

abilities in running it.

Because very few Obama supporters knew who he was

before he ran for prez either.

No one expected this.

Now let's look at Obama's campaign. Advisors running off at the mouth

Saying one thing publically and another thing privatly, and getting caught,

and then denieing it, and then admiting it when all the facts come out.

Painting himself in a political corner, where he cannot attack anyone

with out saying that his whole "I'm about lifting up, not tearing down"

line was a lie.

So who is running their campaign better?

I just saw Sen Clinton come back from being counted out

to talking about a Clinton Obama ticket.

I just saw Obama out spend her, significant;y

and still not be able to "close the deal"

You can't tell me that this was simply because

Sen Clinton used "kitchen sink" tactics.

Give the american ppl a little credit I say.

Who will answer the phone at 3 am is a valid question.

It's not only valid, frankly it's one of the most important

questions to ask.

I said it before and I'll say it again, Obama is not ready yet.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hotstuff — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 17:09:32 GMT

To Hermana:

I totally agree with you...... But it´s no use, trying to argue with the

Clinton lemmings...That would FALSELY assume that they can reason.

They don´t believe in logic, they don´t play by the rules, they twist facts......

Does that remind you of somebody? Right, Hillary!

Like attracts like.... It´s all a question of character!!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

beatstanfurd — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 17:09:51 GMT

Today it was announced that Carl Rove has joined Team McCain...

-as much as anybody of us would love to see a political environment that was not filled with visciousness, venom, and distractions...the addition of Carl Rove to the campaign team of McCain should serve as a clear reminder to all Democrats that it might take a political machine such as the Clintons to defeat the Republicans. Team Clinton has been dismissed and attacked for precisely the qualities that it will take to stand firm against the attack machine known as Carl Rove. Rove is a pitbull: ruthless, no hold barred, no mercy hitman. This is the same guy that may have orchestrated the attacks against McCain and his wife in Bush II v. McCain in the last Republican race. If he can be that viscious against a fellow Republican just imagine what evil he will unleash upon a Democrat. I'm not so sure that the Obama's, their campaign staff, their supporters can stand up to that type of in the trenches dirt, filth, and all out political hardball. If the Obama campaign attempts to turn the other cheek with Rove...game over!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Hermana — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 17:18:29 GMT

Luke,

"Clinton started out expecting to easily clinch the nomination.

And planned her campaign accordingly."

I guess it's all a matter of judgment.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

LukeM42 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 17:23:17 GMT

Hermana,

Yes, it was a matter of judgment.

In the same way Obama hires consultants

who can't keep their mouths shut.

Tell me, do you think he showed good judgment

in hireing them?

And is that the kind of jusgment he will show

when putting together his advisor team if he

becomes prez?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

omldejr — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 17:29:35 GMT

To Beanstanfurd - You better hope Sen. Obama is the Dems choice - if you think Carl Rove will be tough on HIM, then wait til you see what he does with the smarmy, unethical, and totally indefensible previous actions of former 1st Lady Clinton.

I bet 'ol Carl is licking his chops at the prospect of a Fall campaign dismantling HER ethics and honesty.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Hermana — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 17:36:02 GMT

Luke,

Most of Obama's advisors, including Ms. Powers, are not hired. He's not paying them. Unlike Clinton whose money is going doen the rathole of paying her advisors.

And yes, I do think he has shown great judgment in his advisors. Quite a number of them, including Ambassador Dennis Ross, former Assistant Secretary Susan Rice, Michael McFall formerly of Carnegie Foundation, former National Security Advisor Tony Lake, and former Department of Defense official Ian Brzsinski are people that I have had the pleasure of knowing and working with during my career. They have served their country well in the past, and I know they will in the future in an Obama administration.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

mmonc — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 17:53:25 GMT

OOPS - Did I say that out loud?

I meant to say "#itch".

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

LukeM42 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:08:26 GMT

Beanstanfurd,

I just cannot agree with you on this.

A much more likely senario is Rove and Mcain

sweating because they may have to go up

against her.

And to all you Clinton haters. You may be right,

I admit, she may be a monster and B word, when she needs to be.

But she's OUR monster and B word.

When you get past all the hype and media attention,

She's on OUR side.

She's the one who can get thismess cleaned up

and lay the ground work for the changes Obama wants.

Obama is the lamb

Mcain is the lion

Clinton is mama bear

lions eat lambs.

Democrats run a real risk of losing the whitehouse

if it's Mcain vs Obama.

It's gonna come down to who is stronger, and there's

no man I know of who can look Mcain in the eye

and say, "I'm tougher than you".

The best possible senario for the dems is to go into

the general election on a Clinton Obama ticket.

Clinton to go toe to toe with the republican war machine.

And Obama to keep the ppls support while the wheels of change

slowly beging to start moving again.

Together they are invincible, with the ppl behind them

and the Clinton infrastructure in place, there would be almost no end to

the positive changes they could make.

We all want the kind of changes Obama preaches, but

the truth is that can't happen over night. We need someone who

can work with the system as it is, and someone to guid it in the direction

it should be.

And it open the possibility of the next 16 years

of Obama.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

cminani1 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:17:37 GMT

I cant't get along with people calling Senator Clinton a monster or a divider or any other extreme characterisation. I can only stick with the tried and true "polarizing" figure that the media has embraced with a somewhat confounding consensus. But beyond the "monster" gaffe, one has to observe that it was committed by an otherwise respected WOMAN, that the gaffer is of high intellect even if a novice in politics... So let's wait and see.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

mmonc — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:18:06 GMT

LukeM42 - I agree that a Clinton / Obama ticket would be unstoppable BUT I also think that Clinton is more suitable as the VP. She is simply too divisive to garner the much needed support from the other side of the aisle.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

LukeM42 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:52:12 GMT

Personally, I don;t think an Obama /Clinton ticket would fly.

Obama doesn't need another woman behind the scenes pulling his strings.

lol, I appologise for that, but it's the same thing we all said about Bill back in the day.

I know she's not "pulling his strings", but for certian they are a team and work closely together.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

redrebelnorth — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 19:07:08 GMT

Andrew

You're right on the money with this and even the early comments to this post demonstrate that. I have been watching this from Canada since early 2007. I am far from a political animal, but do try to keep an eye to what is going on in the world beyond the place I live. The more I read and watched about this presidential race, the more interested I became because there is such a potential for change in how people think about politics and what should drive the political process.

The Internet offers the opportunity to follow this race in a way that we have not been able to do in the past, and earlier in this process, it was fascinating to be able to read what ordinary people thought about the issues, and how they responded to questions that were being raised. I spend less time now doing reading the discussions because they usually quickly dissolve into a competition of people ripping apart the candidates and anyone that doesn't agree with their perspective.

It would be interesting to read what people think about the changes that have been happening lately in the campaign in regards to what the longer term impact of negative politics has within the Democratic party and if/how it could affect the outcome in November.

In the hope that my comments do not take the discussion further off track I will say up front that I have no expectation that people care what a Canadian thinks, and I am disgusted that anyone in the Canadian government would do anything that could even be perceived as interfering in the political process of another country.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

christian15213 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 19:07:26 GMT

Ramon are you forgetful? Obama staffers didn't do the Canadian flub. It was Clinton's people. Come on buddy keep up with the news.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hotstuff — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 19:15:17 GMT

To LukeM42:

Give it up! Clinton/Obama? Impossible! Obama/Clinton? Unimaginable!

You don´t get it: Hillary represents everything OBAMA abhors!!

No decent person approves of Hillary´s nauseating tactics.

And OBAMA will NOT be used to perfumerise Hillary´s stench

coming straight out of the " kitchen sink"!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hotstuff — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 19:20:40 GMT

Samantha Power was only saying out loud what everybody already knows!!

What´s wrong with saying the truth?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

mvago — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 19:20:41 GMT

HRC is the monster we need. I believe others are threatened by

her intelligence, dilligence and experiences. In my thoughts and discussions

others, I've decided to support HRC. She is the right MONSTER to sign bills

laws to start correcting the MONSTOROUS problems we have today. BHO is a

fine young candidate, though I feel he needs more experience as I've seen all

of the debates. BHO would make a fine president in the future. Personally, I

like BHO as a person...even more so than HRC. Instinct and judgement tell me

she would do a better job.

Interestingly, many BHO supporters have an edge to them that is really

turning me off...more so than the HRC supporters...This can be supported by

many comments found here!

It's getting ugly and I hope this changes for the better of all of US.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

JTCD — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 19:49:32 GMT

As usual, people resort to insults -name callings and down right meanness when they have nothing intelligent or interesting to say. I thought that it was the educated that were supporting senator BHO??? Did the country, including the BHO loving media get it wrong? Have the educated become thugs with limited used of language while the working class has become the more reasonable, smart and interesting people with a better insight into the future? Did all this talk of change really mean "more of the same?" Did GWB not run on the same theme "Change?" Was he not going to clean house and bring value and decency back to America? Guess what? After 8 years? What has changed? Have you not seen surpluss turn into defecit and God I can go on. When did the EDUCATED become so STUPID and the less and semi educated become so VERY SMART? Is this another classic defination of Reversable of Fortune? Many years of study and lots of money spend only to breed a nation of Educated Fools? Just a thought! Really, I hope some educated BHO supporters out there read there, because, for Pete's sake, you need to reevaluate your entire lives and belief system.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hotstuff — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 20:11:14 GMT

To mvago:

This is getting really boring, repeating and re-cycling the same hollow

and totally baseless claims over and over again. Typical of Hillary´s minions,

who don´t seem to have a mind of their own!

OK, let´s take a quick look at Hillary´s "intelligence, diligence and experiences".

Just a few examples:

1) Intelligence:

Hillary is so intelligent that she FAILED the New YorK bar twice!!

So intelligent, that she did NOT have a plan after Super Tuesday!!

(No intelligent C-I-C would go to war, without a thorough plan!!)

2) Diligence:

Hillary is so diligent, that she spent 8 years on her aborted Health Care.

Result? Zero!

Wrote ONLY 20 trivial bills in 6 senate years .( Obama:1886 bills!)

Check Library of Congress.

3) Experiences:

"Governor´s WIFE. President´s WIFE"...... Great qualifications!

(Tell you what, you SHOULD go to the WIFE of a surgeon for brain surgery!!)

Even assuming she´s all she claims to be, there´s still this CHARACTER factor,

That´s exactly what Samantha Power was trying to express in just one word: MONSTER!

So, keep your monster to yourself. We, the Obama supporters and all decent

people around the world don´t want any part of it! To each and every one his own!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

sara48909 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 20:14:59 GMT

Clinton did NOT lie about NAFTA. Obama stooges LIE again. http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5gNMJKvj5eQRQBNSeQj3bTyETSagQ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080308.NAFTA08/TPStory/National

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-na-nafta8mar08,1,295847.story

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

EQUINOX — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 20:18:25 GMT

HOT FROM TELEGRAPH UK

HILLARY'S EXPERIENCE!!!

quoted in the Daily Telegraph:

Hillary Clinton had no direct role in bringing peace to Northern Ireland and is a "wee bit silly" for exaggerating the part she played, according to Lord Trimble of Lisnagarvey, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former First Minister of the province.

Even more damaging for Clinton, the article says:

Steven King, a negotiator with Lord Trimble’s Ulster Unionist Party, argued that Mrs Clinton might even have helped delay the chances of peace. "She was invited along to some pre-arranged meetings but I don’t think she exactly brought anybody together that hadn’t been brought together already," he said. Mrs Clinton was "a cheerleader for the Irish republican side of the argument", he added.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

LukeM42 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 20:23:39 GMT

Hotstuff, I denounce AND reject your claim that only decent ppl support obama, and there for anyone who doesn't support him is not decent.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

mvago — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 20:34:10 GMT

To hotstuff

Psssst, apparently your temperature is affecting your facts.

Irresposible claims such as yours w/ re to HRC bar exams results from NY.

Fact, over 50% fail the first try. HRC failed DC's bar exam once. Not NY.

It's folks like you that I was refering to a few posts down...Keep up your

misinformation and ugliness...Perfect for irresponsible citizenship and

polorization...MBS

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hotstuff — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 20:41:57 GMT

To ALL CLINTON SUPPORTERS!

_____________________________

Whatever happened to VINCE FOSTER?????

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

LukeM42 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 20:57:11 GMT

To the best of wikkipedia's knowlege, Vince Foster , tragically, committed suicide.

Do you mean to say you have evidence to cantradict this?

Some dna or documents or video tape?

Or just a "hunch", and a touch of republican brain washing?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

thechozyn1 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:12:55 GMT

As a BHO supporter, my primary concern is how we quantify a candidate's experience. Simply put, political experience is not something that begins in Washington. BHO served the Illinois State Senate from January 8, 1997 to November 4, 2004. When you couple that term with his current term in the U.S. Senate, which started January 5, 2005, BHO has served over 10 years in ELECTED office. On the otherhand, you have HRO, who started her U.S. Senate term January 3, 2001. So far, HRO has little over 7+ years serving in an ELECTED office compared to BHO's 10+. This is a cold hard fact that for whatever reason gets very little press.

Granted, no reference was made to HRO's years as First Lady, because the country does not elect First Spouses. In fact, if you had to compare the First Spouse to other non-elected positions in Washington, even high level appointments go through some sort of confirmation process. Simply put, HRO has spent 8 years of her political career in a position that was hers by default. Being First Spouse is an entitlement due to being married to a President. There are no electionrs or Senate confirmation hearings to be First Spouse

Of the 16 women now serving in the U.S. Senate, only 4 of them reached the U.S. Senate without any prior ELECTED experience in the House of Representatives or their respective state legislatures. 3 of the 4 served in some sort of politically appointed position. HRO is the only one of the 16 that has neither prior ELECTED office nor politically appointed experience. In fact, the vast majority of U.S. Senators have had some prior stint in ELECTABLE office before being put in a position as powerful as U.S. Senator. Chuck Schumer, the other Senator from New York, served 18 years in the House of Representatives prior to starting in the U.S. Senate in 1999.

As a BHO supporter, I am highly aware of these facts when leveling criticism of HRO. From a feminist perspective, it is highly insulting to suggest that she is the most qualified woman to potentially hold the office of President. The current Madame Speaker of the House has spent more time in Washington than either HRO or her husband. True, the Speaker hails from a powerful political family, but that doesn't make her much different from her male counterparts. At least the Speaker did not have to marry into power. Afterall, that has been the traditional way in which women have had to climb the political ranks since the dawn of government, and in 2008 it is both shameful and offensive that such a traditional and subservient ascent to power is being trumpeted as experience worth recognizing. To all the women that climbed the ranks of politicial power without riding on the coattails of their male significant other, HRO's candidacy is a step back for everything they have fought for. What are we teaching young women? If you marry well, then you too can become Senator or President?

Does anyone really think that anybody else could buy a home in New York, after not living there before, and then be elected Senator of one the nations most powerful states a year and two months later had their spouse not been a popular President? It is dubious at best that anyone else could accomplish such a feat without some sort of significant Presidential backing.

For all is flaws, BHO is his own person, and nobody had given him anything. Perhaps it is the years spent as a community organizer, or the decade of experience that he has representing other people by their consent and backing.

These campaigns have beeen the biggest things that either HRO or BHO has ever run. BHO has planned for and has been prepared to run a long campaign. HRO expected everything to be wrapped up by Super Tuesday. For the candidate that claims to be ready to be President on "Day One", why was she not ready to face such a challenge from BHO on Day One?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

thechozyn1 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:31:14 GMT

As a BHO supporter, my primary concern is how we quantify a candidate's experience. Simply put, political experience is not something that begins in Washington. BHO served the Illinois State Senate from January 8, 1997 to November 4, 2004. When you couple that term with his current term in the U.S. Senate, which started January 5, 2005, BHO has served over 10 years in ELECTED office. On the otherhand, you have HRC, who started her U.S. Senate term January 3, 2001. So far, HRC has little over 7+ years serving in an ELECTED office compared to BHO's 10+. This is a cold hard fact that for whatever reason gets very little press.

Granted, no reference was made to HRC's years as First Lady, because the country does not elect First Spouses. In fact, if you had to compare the First Spouse to other non-elected positions in Washington, even high level appointments go through some sort of confirmation process. Simply put, HRC has spent 8 years of her political career in a position that was hers by default. Being First Spouse is an entitlement due to being married to a President. There are no electionrs or Senate confirmation hearings to be First Spouse

Of the 16 women now serving in the U.S. Senate, only 4 of them reached the U.S. Senate without any prior ELECTED experience in the House of Representatives or their respective state legislatures. 3 of the 4 served in some sort of politically appointed position. HRC is the only one of the 16 that has neither prior ELECTED office nor politically appointed experience. In fact, the vast majority of U.S. Senators have had some prior stint in ELECTABLE office before being put in a position as powerful as U.S. Senator. Chuck Schumer, the other Senator from New York, served 18 years in the House of Representatives prior to starting in the U.S. Senate in 1999.

As a BHO supporter, I am highly aware of these facts when leveling criticism of HRC. From a feminist perspective, it is highly insulting to suggest that she is the most qualified woman to potentially hold the office of President. The current Madame Speaker of the House has spent more time in Washington than either HRC or her husband. True, the Speaker hails from a powerful political family, but that doesn't make her much different from her male counterparts. At least the Speaker did not have to marry into power. Afterall, that has been the traditional way in which women have had to climb the political ranks since the dawn of government, and in 2008 it is both shameful and offensive that such a traditional and subservient ascent to power is being trumpeted as experience worth recognizing. To all the women that climbed the ranks of politicial power without riding on the coattails of their male significant other, HRO's candidacy is a step back for everything they have fought for. What are we teaching young women? If you marry well, then you too can become Senator or President?

These campaigns have beeen the biggest things that either HRC or BHO has ever run. BHO has planned for and has been prepared to run a long campaign. HRC expected everything to be wrapped up by Super Tuesday. For the candidate that claims to be ready to be President on "Day One", why was she not ready to face such a challenge from BHO on Day One?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

thechozyn1 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:31:52 GMT

As a BHO supporter, my primary concern is how we quantify a candidate's experience. Simply put, political experience is not something that begins in Washington. BHO served the Illinois State Senate from January 8, 1997 to November 4, 2004. When you couple that term with his current term in the U.S. Senate, which started January 5, 2005, BHO has served over 10 years in ELECTED office. On the otherhand, you have HRC, who started her U.S. Senate term January 3, 2001. So far, HRC has little over 7+ years serving in an ELECTED office compared to BHO's 10+. This is a cold hard fact that for whatever reason gets very little press.

Of the 16 women now serving in the U.S. Senate, only 4 of them reached the U.S. Senate without any prior ELECTED experience in the House of Representatives or their respective state legislatures. 3 of the 4 served in some sort of politically appointed position. HRC is the only one of the 16 that has neither prior ELECTED office nor politically appointed experience. In fact, the vast majority of U.S. Senators have had some prior stint in ELECTABLE office before being put in a position as powerful as U.S. Senator. Chuck Schumer, the other Senator from New York, served 18 years in the House of Representatives prior to starting in the U.S. Senate in 1999.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

thechozyn1 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:33:44 GMT

As a BHO supporter, my primary concern is how we quantify a candidate's experience. Simply put, political experience is not something that begins in Washington. BHO served the Illinois State Senate from January 8, 1997 to November 4, 2004. When you couple that term with his current term in the U.S. Senate, which started January 5, 2005, BHO has served over 10 years in ELECTED office. On the otherhand, you have HRC, who started her U.S. Senate term January 3, 2001. So far, HRC has little over 7+ years serving in an ELECTED office compared to BHO's 10+. This is a cold hard fact that for whatever reason gets very little press.

Of the 16 women now serving in the U.S. Senate, only 4 of them reached the U.S. Senate without any prior ELECTED experience in the House of Representatives or their respective state legislatures. 3 of the 4 served in some sort of politically appointed position. HRC is the only one of the 16 that has neither prior ELECTED office nor politically appointed experience. In fact, the vast majority of U.S. Senators have had some prior stint in ELECTABLE office before being put in a position as powerful as U.S. Senator. Chuck Schumer, the other Senator from New York, served 18 years in the House of Representatives prior to starting in the U.S. Senate in 1999.

As a BHO supporter, I am highly aware of these facts when leveling criticism of HRC. From a feminist perspective, it is highly insulting to suggest that she is the most qualified woman to potentially hold the office of President. The current Madame Speaker of the House has spent more time in Washington than either HRC or her husband. True, the Speaker hails from a powerful political family, but that doesn't make her much different from her male counterparts. At least the Speaker did not have to marry into power. Afterall, that has been the traditional way in which women have had to climb the political ranks since the dawn of government, and in 2008 it is both shameful and offensive that such a traditional and subservient ascent to power is being trumpeted as experience worth recognizing. To all the women that climbed the ranks of politicial power without riding on the coattails of their male significant other, HRC's candidacy is a step back for everything they have fought for. What are we teaching young women? If you marry well, then you too can become Senator or President?

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Sat, 08 Mar 2008 22:35:54 GMT

What got me to comment was a basic lack of American politcal understanding. It doesn't matter how many bills you write, lets talk about what Obama has gotten passed. Last count that would be ,oh yeah, a big fat ZERO. Why, because American politics works by compromising with everybody and Hillary knows this and can work the system [finally] and get things passed. It doesn't look like Obama has figured this out yet and thus has gotten little done. And when you start to promise you'll do everything , people do start to wonder HOW? Thanks to Bush's Iraq excursion, this country is BROKE and to pay for anything you'll have to take the money away from an existing program . Hillary faces the same problem and now with the recession it will be harder to find the money to change things. Maybe somehow they can work things out and end up on the same ticket but it doesn't look good. We[USA] might be the best militarily but all of us Americans need to realize we are not the power economically we were and we need to stop spending billions for the best and latest militarily[B2 bomber cost 2 billion] and were is this great equipment going to be used? And my sons in the military but really, those bombers are mostly useless because we aren't going to have a need for them as the worlds economy becomes more and more intertwined, who are we going to be fighting? Al Quada not Russia.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

hotstuff — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 22:42:09 GMT

To "mvago":

Thank you for drawing my attention to the fact that Hillary FAILED

her DC bar exam ONCE, and NOT TWICE in NY. I concede the

error and I´m sorry about that!

Having said that, MY ARGUMENTS STILL HOLD!! The IMPORTANT point

is SHE FAILED! I wouldn´t even care if she failed or not, IF YOU WOULD

NOT KEEP ON TOUTING HER SO-CALLED INTELLIGENCE!

OBAMA is ALSO VERY INTELLIGENT! (Check out his academic achievements!)

But neither he nor most of his supporters make so much noise about it!

According to your own admission, 50% fail at first try! That would mean

that 50% MAKE IT THE FIRST TIME! Now, if your idol Hillary wereSO INTELLIGENT,

she would have been able to make it the first time! Can you follow the logic?

SO, STOP MAKING NOISE ABOUT HILLARY´s INTELLIGENCE! She is cunny!

Apparently, you acknowledge all the other facts and arguments.

But the essential point is this:

EVEN IF HILLARY WERE THE MOST INTELLIGENT, MOST DILIGENT,

MOST EXPERIENCED INDIVIDUAL IN THE UNIVERSE, HER CHARACTER

DISQUALIFIES HER ABSOLUTELY!!

But it´s a free world! You are totally free to keep your monster! Don´t try to

force her down our throats. We don´t think it´s very palatable!!

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Bingo 1908 — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 00:24:49 GMT

What is wrong with calling somebody a monster? You must have enough movies that create them all the time. Starting with the escape from Kin Kong in New York all heading for the White House

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Bingo 1908 — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 00:37:41 GMT

Correction: my comment did not fit on the page so I repeat

What is wrong with somebody calling a monster. You must

have seen enough monster movies , to begin with the escape from

King Kong in New York all heading for the White house.

You get what you deserve

Bingo

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

Tariq77 — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 00:43:03 GMT

Well, there are very few words that fully capture Clinton's relentlessness and desperate measures that include praising McCain over Obama in terms of experience and giving Republicans ammunition. Maybe "monster" is not one of them but it is one of many synonyms. Clinton constantly criticizes Obama on being about just speech and no action, but when she is out there criticizing Obama she is actually doing that in a "speech." When she is bragging about why she ought to be elected, again she is giving a "speech" and "speaking" about what she wants to do as a president. Have we seen any of her promises? No! So when Obama is giving speeches that inspire and move people....she is also giving speeches that.....well, in her case it would just be speeches. I have yet to see rhetoric emptier than "vote for me because I am a woman."

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

cleoant — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 00:57:21 GMT

I did not have a problem with the "monster" comment. Typically, statements made off the cuff are the speaker's beliefs, feelings or thoughts. What I did have a problem with was her speaking out of the other side of her mouth and saying how wonderful Clinton is when she was called out. I may have written her original comment off as just a bad day or an insightful look at the behind-the-scenes doings and simply ignored it; with her backtracking, I have now lost both interest in and respect for her and whatever she may stand for. As for Clinton, the past cannot be rewritten.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

LukeM42 — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 01:00:52 GMT

Hotstuff seems to delight in exactly the kind of politcs Obama claims

to denounce and reject.

I really enjoied that debate, we needed to see how the 2 are different,

and this really showed the biggest difference.

She made him denounce and reject Farahkan (sorry for the bad spelling)

Obama complied.

How many times durring that debate did he either defer to her or concede

the point to her?

Let's not argue about who is smarter, Clinton and Obam are both very smart.

But I get the impression that Obama is an intellectual at heart.

He does amazing alone on a stage, reading speaches, but when you put him up against

someone strong willed and passionate, he crumbles.

We all saw it happen several times durring that last debate.

And I guarentee you Clinton was going easy on him.

Mcain will not go easy on him.

So the question to you Obama supporters is, do you want a democrat in the WH

next year or not?

Mcain will make Obama look like a schoolboy who wants to alienate his closest allies

with the threat of pulling out of nafta, while at the same time

getting cozy with terrorists and dictators.

Obama claims he wouldn;t have started iraq if it was up to him. Yet we just hear from

another one of his consultants talking to a forign government that he

wont actually do anything about iraq till he sees the classified documents regarding iraq

and talks to the commanders in iraq.

So if he can say he opposed the war with out seeing any classified documents

or talking to any commanders, why does he need their advice now?

Hes Obama after all, he can just go to the middle east and give a speach.

We'll have peace in the middle east, oil will be free, and our cars wont give off

green house gasses anymore.

sigh, I appologise for that, truth is I do like Obama, what I don;t like is

this mass hypnosis his supporters seem to place themsleves under.

There must be a psychological term for this spell ppl like Hotstuff are under.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

thinkingstraightgirl — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 02:33:01 GMT

I’m pleased to log on tonight and see a higher level of maturity, and more intelligent postings than last night. I was shocked to log on the web site of a British rock band and find a more intelligent analysis of Obama versus Clinton than last night’s postings on this site (the site of a major American weekly news magazine). I’m proud to be an American but last night I was honestly truly embarrassed for and by some of my fellow Americans.

LukeM42, when hotstuff posted at 3:41 PM, the question, “Whatever happened to VINCE FOSTER?????” I was able to figure out that he/she meant BEFORE the suicide. Can you intelligently and maturely share some FACT BASED opinions about pre-suicide events for all of us to contemplate?

I’m looking forward to reading the postings and learning from all of you.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

lift9 — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 03:15:31 GMT

I'm an Obama supporter. I'm not stupid, a follower, under a spell, or voting for him for any other reason than because he's the best choice. What I don't like is the arrogance, ignorance and prejudice that is behind the thought that because so many people prefer him to Clinton, something must be wrong with their judgement. That something weird must be at work. It's ridiculous. I'm tired of our country being run down by arrogant, dishonest, corrupt, greedy, bullies. For the moron that speculated that Clinton would win in a contest of being shrill and mean spirited, I think that you're right. But Obama would win if the contest was about being thoughtful and inclusive, and finding a way for people to come out better in the end. He's looking to serve our country, not to have one final, history making ego trip. The reason that he has so many supporters is because we have given him the benefit of a doubt, did our research, and can see that he's the best person to start repairing the mess that still happening now.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

LukeM42 — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 03:32:32 GMT

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

and

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

In a nut shell, Vince Foster was involved in the early Clinton administraton of the 90s

Deputy WH Counsel I believe was his title, Mr Foster seems to have been involved

with the Whitewater affair.

Though all offical investigations into his death reported it as suicide,

there still seem to be unoffical theories and urban legends

that claim either the Clintons or the republicans could have been involved.

So again, I say, if you have any evidence to contradict the findings

of the official investigation, by all means, please share it with us.

Because the thing I recall the most of those days was the relentless

hounding of the Clintons by the right wing .

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

LukeM42 — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 05:10:16 GMT

And for our younger readers who may not know what Whitewater was,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitewater_%28controversy%29

Brings back memories don;t it? Of the 90s?

Millions of new jobs

A great economy

Most of the rest of the planet was friendly

And perhaps most importantly, the Clintons did much for

minorities , women and gays .

It's easy to forget all that though isn't it? In the face of all the anti Clinton

propoganda. Out of all the great things the Clintons did in the 90s, all anyone

seems to care about is Monica and Whitewater.

You seem to forget that the change Obama is talking about today is the change

the Clintons started in the 90s. You also seem to forget the resistance they met.

It was a republican whitchhunt. Kenn Starr was like a rabid dog who was searching

and digging for anything he could use against the Clintons, real or imagined,

and just lumped it all under the heading of Whitewater.

You seem to think that because Mr Starr couldn't make anything stick, the Clintons

were just too "slipery". Rather than the simple fact that Mr Starr was just pulling

things out of his hat.

And what was the only thing he could come up with? An indiscretion in the ora ,, I mean

oval office?

To impeach someone for that was simply outrageous.

I know some of you really are that pure and holy and so have the right to

cast the first stone and claim Bill dishonored himself and the office by

"not having sex with that woman" lol remember the debate that set off?

is it sex or not? lmao . Well, guess that;'s why the call it oral sex.

That was a private matter between theClintons, and that we all had to

sit through it, thanks to Ken Starr and a very sick news media who doesn't

mind being a pawn in someones witch hunt if there's a dollar to be made.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

waeone — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 05:29:27 GMT

Obama and Clinton politics as usual. How refreshing Obama has been with his messages to the people. I am so upset to learn that things are said and done behind closed doors with reference to the opponent and the opponet's campaign. Gee, I just hope I don't learn of the Clinton campaign having such goings on behind their closed doors. Instead of learing that Obama would not be able to make a split decision at 3:00AM concerning the welfare of the nation and its people - I just wonder if Senator Clinton could make that decision without having to pee first. We need to enroll all of our First Ladies or First Men in the same diplimatic courses that Senator Clinton took over the years which has, so well, enabled her to protect and keep safe what's ours. Are these courses voluntary, or are they required learning, I wonder.

Do I sleep better at night knowing Geroge Bush may have to answer the phone at 3:00AM, no. I don't rest knowing that he might answer the phone period regardless of the time.

The American People are tired of having politics as usual shoved down their throats. Isn't it obvious that we are thirsting for new and different faces and voices?

It's a shame that we take what could be a great experience in the greatest country of the world and make a shambles out of it for the whole world to see. In recent years it seems as if we always leave the trap door unbottoned and our ass sticking out.

re: The Real Problem with Power's "Monster" Remark

mikey605 — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 07:29:44 GMT

Ahhhh yes the good ole Clinton Years. Let’s see, well there's the Dot.Com bubble busting leading into the recession of 2000. You also may be correct about 1 Million jobs created; unfortunately over 500,000 of those jobs were created in the Federal Government alone. A friendly world? DUH, World trade center 1, USS Cole, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Khobar Towers, The US Embassies at Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, added to that the our HUGE popularity in Germany and France, Iraq, Iran.....

Monica and Whitewater..... I guess you forgot about Paula Jones and Jennifer Flowers.

Ya know.... If Billy wanted to "getter done" with Monica, well that's his business I guess, however as Commander-in-Chief of our Armed Forces he had a responsibility to lead by example. Yet he cashiered in many dedicated and promising military leaders careers over the same "moral issues" he was accused of..... So much for do as I say and not do as I do. However in that case he should have followed their example by leaving his office.

I’m sorry it was not just a case of Oral sex.... it was a case of lying under oath in a deposition about Paula Jones and Monica, obstructing justice in an official investigation, witness intimidation and tampering either personally or by proxy...... and so on. It was evident enough that the he was impeached by congress and the senate. He was also disbarred from practicing Law in his state and had to pay an over $800,000.00 settlement for a sexual harassment case.

What does all of this have to do with Hillary????? Well the great champion of women's causes, the future person who claims to be ready to answer the dreaded phone call at 3:00 am, is an enabler for a sexual predator. She is also an individual whom will stoop to any means to gain her goals, create any illusion that defames her opponents, make totally any unsubstantiated claim of personal qualifications while ridiculing her adversaries qualifications, change any rule to benefit her position Yet as soon as someone has the courage to call her on it, or demand that she either show proof or such qualifications and to comply with disclosures that EVERY other candidate, regardless of party affiliation has complied with, she claims being picked on because she is a woman, or not part of the big boy club. How does she reply, she has her lackeys call the individual Ken Starr If she cannot take the name calling, after all in some countries our Presidents past and current are hung in effigy. If she can’t take the heat then she should not be the DNC Nominee for President. You know, to quote a movie about an American President, this job is all about character. Something that a certain Senator from New York has yet to show, but then again this is her destiny and no-one is going to keep her from her destiny especially those pesky little people voting for Obama. After all what do they know.